McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Mr Gray]

Interesting, this has been moderated, but the ad hom left it tact.

its acceptable to criticise posts ...but not the poster...i dont see that my post has been moderated

[The General]

its acceptable to criticise posts ...but not the poster...i dont see that my post has been moderated

Depends who you are whether criticising the post is deemed criticising the poster, as has been ably demonstrated this morning.

[Brietta]

The topic is ... McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights ... please remember that when posting on this thread.  Thank you.

[Mr Gray]

Of course if the McCanns had decided not to go to the ECHR
no doubt there would have been just as much criticism and nastiness directed at that decision

[The General]

The topic is ... McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights ... please remember that when posting on this thread.  Thank you.

I did, but that didn't seem to make any difference.
I maintain, irrespective of the result, of which I have no interest, the decision to pursue is folly and driven by misplaced hubris.
And who's paying? Aren't there a couple of invoices still outstanding? So perhaps it's also a questionable commercial venture too.

Disclaimer: All posts are for entertainment purposes only and are not to be taken literally. The views, information, or opinions expressed in posts are solely those of the individuals involved (The General) and do not necessarily represent those of the forum, the owner or any other entity. The General's content posted may be freely copied and used elsewhere as an example of literary excellence, or for others to use to deliver a slap down to third parties.

[Mr Gray]

I did, but that didn't seem to make any difference.
I maintain, irrespective of the result, of which I have no interest, the decision to pursue is folly and driven by misplaced hubris.
And who's paying? Aren't there a couple of invoices still outstanding? So perhaps it's also a questionable commercial venture too.

Disclaimer: All posts are for entertainment purposes only and are not to be taken literally. The views, information, or opinions expressed in posts are solely those of the individuals involved (The General) and do not necessarily represent those of the forum, the owner or any other entity. The General's content posted may be freely copied and used elsewhere as an example of literary excellence, or for others to use to deliver a slap down to third parties.

You can maintain as much as you like... The problem is there's no impartial judge to decide who's right or wrong.
Afaiac.... The action to the ECHR is justified... Proportionate.. Necessary... Rational... And lots of other nice words

[The General]

You can maintain as much as you like... The problem is there's no impartial judge to decide who's right or wrong.
Afaiac.... The action to the ECHR is justified... Proportionate.. Necessary... Rational... And lots of other nice words

It's just my opinion (as per the new disclaimer). I even believe they had no idea what they were signing up for, as it was meant to be a forgone conclusion and getting embroiled in a costly, epoch stretching appeal was never in the plan.

[Mr Gray]

It's just my opinion (as per the new disclaimer). I even believe they had no idea what they were signing up for, as it was meant to be a forgone conclusion and getting embroiled in a costly, epoch stretching appeal was never in the plan.

Of course what happened wasn't in the plan... They expected justice and imo didn't get it

[The General]

Of course what happened wasn't in the plan... They expected justice and imo didn't get it

They got due process though.
They expected a favourable result and maybe hoped that the shoe would be on the other foot, safe in the knowledge that Snr Amaral wouldn't be able to afford an appeal.
All will be revealed in June 2061, all being well.

[Eleanor]

Which is most important?  A right to Libel someone without Proof, or a Right to Defend oneself?  I do have some conception of what Portuguese Law is all about, probably influenced by the not so long ago Revolution, but it makes no sense to me at all.  Portugal is a Third World Country and will remain so while the Old Guard are still in charge.

[jassi]

Which is most important?  A right to Libel someone without Proof, or a Right to Defend oneself?  I do have some conception of what Portuguese Law is all about, probably influenced by the not so long ago Revolution, but it makes no sense to me at all.  Portugal is a Third World Country and will remain so while the Old Guard are still in charge.

Nicely put.  Best left to the judges who do know what they're about.  IMO

[Eleanor]

Nicely put.  Best left to the judges who do know what they're about.  IMO

That is the problem.  Their attitude is skewed.  Watch what happens if anyone Libels them, or anyone else with a vestige of power.  Amaral was born and raised Pre Revolution which likely explains why he doesn't have a problem with Torture.

The ECHR will have a problem with this.

[jassi]

That is the problem.  Their attitude is skewed.  Watch what happens if anyone Libels them, or anyone else with a vestige of power.  Amaral was born and raised Pre Revolution which likely explains why he doesn't have a problem with Torture.

The ECHR will have a problem with this.

Maybe, maybe not.  What is certain is that their decision is final.

[misty]

Nicely put.  Best left to the judges who do know what they're about.  IMO

Ah, but do they?  Spot the difference.
 
https://www.portugalresident.com/former-mep-ana-gomes-faces-new-case-for-defamation/

https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/court-rejects-isabel-dos-santos-libel-case-against-ana-gomes/52738

[Mr Gray]

Maybe, maybe not.  What is certain is that their decision is final.

depends what you mean by final. IMO A judgement in the McCanns favour could well have repercussions for amaral