McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[The General]

I don't think he's responsible for the book and video now... I still think the echr case hangs over him

I'm not so sure. I think there's a very definite bell curve of interest, which only waxes and wanes with anniversaries and the like. And that interest curve had its zenith a few years ago. Any mileage / revenue thereafter is likely to be limited.

[G-Unit]

On page 4 of the official SC judgement it gives amarals statement in Portuguese... He uses the words..
Vou provar.... Which translates, as... I will prove...
So unless the SC also got it wrong... The version I have given is correct

Which suggests the judges saw it and thought nothing of it. It's just you banging on about it then.

[Mr Gray]

Which suggests the judges saw it and thought nothing of it. It's just you banging on about it then.

I think it's quite significant that amaral claimed to be able to prove maddie died in the apartment and her death was covered up... The fact that the judges thought nothing of it points to their poor judgement in my opinion.

[The General]

I think it's quite significant that amaral claimed to be able to prove maddie died in the apartment and her death was covered up... The fact that the judges thought nothing if it points to their poor judgement in my opinion

Beyond their remit.

[Mr Gray]

Beyond their remit.

Not really... It was claimed amaral was only repeating what was in the files... He obviously  wasnt

[G-Unit]

I think it's quite significant that amaral claimed to be able to prove maddie died in the apartment and her death was covered up... The fact that the judges thought nothing if it points to their poor judgement in my opinion

Did the McCanns complain about it in their submissions to the Portuguese courts? If not, then it won't be considered by the ECHR.

[Brietta]

Or I will demonstrate.

Where did you find that?  My search translated "vou provar" as "I will prove".

[Mr Gray]

Did the McCanns complain about it in their submissions to the Portuguese courts? If not, then it won't be considered by the ECHR.

In your opinion.. In mine it could

[Eleanor]

Did the McCanns complain about it in their submissions to the Portuguese courts? If not, then it won't be considered by the ECHR.

I don't think that is true.

And can we have a few more IMOs, please.  I don't want to have to start deleting comments because of the lack of.

[Mr Gray]

Where did you find that?  My search translated "vou provar" as "I will prove".

I think it's called trying to muddy the waters... Unsuccessfully  imo.. Neither gunit nor slart managed a cite.
In fact both demonstrate and show can also mean prove depending in the context

[G-Unit]

In your opinion.. In mine it could

If a violation hasn't been brought to the attention of the Portuguese courts then it can't be included in an application to the ECHR.

Violations of articles of the Convention must be pleaded substantively at first instance, with specific reference to the applicable Convention Articles. It is appropriate to plead the same Convention arguments on appeal
and to the highest court, or any other constitutional court or court of cassation which acts
as a court of last resort. The principle of subsidiarity requires that national courts must have
the opportunity to consider and redress the alleged violation(s).
https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_ECHR_lawyers_ENG.pdf

[Mr Gray]

If a violation hasn't been brought to the attention of the Portuguese courts then it can't be included in an application to the ECHR.

Violations of articles of the Convention must be pleaded substantively at first instance, with specific reference to the applicable Convention Articles. It is appropriate to plead the same Convention arguments on appeal
and to the highest court, or any other constitutional court or court of cassation which acts
as a court of last resort. The principle of subsidiarity requires that national courts must have
the opportunity to consider and redress the alleged violation(s).
https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_ECHR_lawyers_ENG.pdf

The violation is article 8...in this case, defamation. Anything that defames is therefore relevant.
If you look at some past cases you will understand

[G-Unit]

The violation is article 8...in this case, defamation. Anything that defames is therefore relevant.
If you look at some past cases you will understand

Only the claims made to the Portuguese courts (and rejected or ignored by them) will be considered, not 'anything'.

[Mr Gray]

Only the claims made to the Portuguese courts (and rejected or ignored by them) will be considered, not 'anything'.

I didn't say "anything"... You are quoting your opinion but I think your knowledge is lacking.  I have looked at previous cases where they look at what statements amounted to defamation... On what evidence were these claims made... Were the claims made balanced.
For that reason all the claims made by amaral will be very relevant imo.

[G-Unit]

I didn't say "anything"... You are quoting your opinion but I think your knowledge is lacking.  I have looked at previous cases where they look at what statements amounted to defamation... On what evidence were these claims made... Were the claims made balanced.
For that reason all the claims made by amaral will be very relevant imo.

The claims made by the McCanns to the Portuguese courts are what the ECHR will look at.