McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Mr Gray]

Even more annoyance.

I'm happy to debate in a civilised manner but opinion and fact need to be seperated

[Robittybob1]

Could you address gunits continued statement of opinion as fact

I don't know what is opinion and what is fact in this debate.  As I said it is beyond me, but I still find it interesting.
Just be careful not to word your arguments in a way that belittles another's intelligence, as I'll call them "ad hom" and take action. 

[Mr Gray]

I don't know what is opinion and what is fact in this debate.  As I said it is beyond me, but I still find it interesting.
Just be careful not to word your arguments in a way that belittles another's intelligence, as I'll call them "ad hom" and take action.

It's not my problem if  a poster believes their opinion is fact... When it isnt

[G-Unit]

Important points about applying to the ECHR.


Are there any procedures that must be followed beforehand in the national courts?

" Yes. You must have used all the remedies in the State concerned
that could provide redress for the situation you are complaining
about (usually this will mean an application to the appropriate
court, followed by an appeal, where applicable, and even a
further appeal to a higher court such as the supreme court or
constitutional court, if there is one)...

The Court does not act as a court of appeal in relation to national
courts; it does not rehear cases, it cannot quash, vary or revise
their decisions.
https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Questions_Answers_ENG.pdf
" It is not enough merely to make use of these remedies. In so
doing, you must also have actually raised your complaints (the
substance of the Convention violations you are alleging).

[Mr Gray]

Important points about applying to the ECHR.


Are there any procedures that must be followed beforehand in the national courts?

" Yes. You must have used all the remedies in the State concerned
that could provide redress for the situation you are complaining
about (usually this will mean an application to the appropriate
court, followed by an appeal, where applicable, and even a
further appeal to a higher court such as the supreme court or
constitutional court, if there is one)...

The Court does not act as a court of appeal in relation to national
courts; it does not rehear cases, it cannot quash, vary or revise
their decisions.
https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Questions_Answers_ENG.pdf
" It is not enough merely to make use of these remedies. In so
doing, you must also have actually raised your complaints (the
substance of the Convention violations you are alleging).

The mccanns have raised the issue Re right to reputation and also presumption of innocence... Re the book and video

Any statement made in the book or video is therefore relevant

[G-Unit]

The mccanns have raised the issue Re right to reputation and also presumption of innocence... Re the book and video

Any statement made in the book or video is therefore relevant

The judge of the first instance said;

 It is important to keep in mind that it is not illegal to sustain the thesis according to which Madeleine McCann died in the apartment of Praia da Luz and that her body was concealed by her parents. The scope of the lawsuit is the affirmation, by the defendant Goncalo Amaral, in the book, the interview and the documentary, in the concrete terms that he used, of the same thesis.
page 48   http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0

[Mr Gray]

The judge of the first instance said;

 It is important to keep in mind that it is not illegal to sustain the thesis according to which Madeleine McCann died in the apartment of Praia da Luz and that her body was concealed by her parents. The scope of the lawsuit is the affirmation, by the defendant Goncalo Amaral, in the book, the interview and the documentary, in the concrete terms that he used, of the same thesis.
page 48   http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0

Why is, the judge talking  of illegalty if this is, a, civil trial

I'm not sure what you are, trying to prove/show/demonstrate  with this, post.. It doesn't really address, anything

[G-Unit]

Why is, the judge talking  of illegalty if this is, a, civil trial

I'm not sure what you are, trying to prove/show/demonstrate  with this, post.. It doesn't really address, anything

She didn't rule against Amaral because of what he said, she ruled against him because of who he was.

[Robittybob1]

She didn't rule against Amaral because of what he said, she ruled against him because of who he was.

If it was a crime for Amaral to have published a book and a video about a case he had inside information on, it should have been the state of Portugal to take action against Amaral.  It seems weird that the judge in the first instance finds against Amaral for an issue that doesn't seem to be raised by the McCanns.

Did the the McCanns raise this issue? (Duty of reserve)  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7993.0

[Mr Gray]

I don't know what is opinion and what is fact in this debate.  As I said it is beyond me, but I still find it interesting.
Just be careful not to word your arguments in a way that belittles another's intelligence, as I'll call them "ad hom" and take action.

this is the post you object to...

   1...I really don't think you understand the process at all...

 2....It reminds me of ..the only thing worse than lack of knowledge is the assumption of knowledge... Which imo describes your post to a tee.

Are you really not aware you are stating your opinion not fact

And I'm not sure what.. If anything... You are basing your opinion  on

point ! is nothing to do with intelligence  but the understanding of the facts. Gunit is staing facts which I diont think are true and I think its acceptable to conclude she doesnt understand the principles involved.

Point 2 is criticising the post not the poster so is not ad hom


I cannot help but respond when gunit continually posts her opinion as fact...Eleanor has already warned her  about this so its not just me

[The General]

this is the post you object to...

   1...I really don't think you understand the process at all...

 2....It reminds me of ..the only thing worse than lack of knowledge is the assumption of knowledge... Which imo describes your post to a tee.

Are you really not aware you are stating your opinion not fact

And I'm not sure what.. If anything... You are basing your opinion  on

point ! is nothing to do with intelligence  but the understanding of the facts. Gunit is staing facts which I diont think are true and I think its acceptable to conclude she doesnt understand the principles involved.

Point 2 is criticising the post not the poster so is not ad hom


I cannot help but respond when gunit continually posts her opinion as fact...Eleanor has already warned her  about this so its not just me

When you state that a poster is wrong, or has a ridiculous stance, then, by default, you are stating that your take on it is correct, ergo, you're stating opinion as fact. Surely you can see the irony of your accusation.
You 'cannot help but respond' because you think your opinion is fact. And as for Eleanor's support - I'd expect nothing less from the most biased of the moderation team - watch the last sentence disappear....

[Venturi Swirl]

When you state that a poster is wrong, or has a ridiculous stance, then, by default, you are stating that your take on it is correct, ergo, you're stating opinion as fact. Surely you can see the irony of your accusation.
You 'cannot help but respond' because you think your opinion is fact. And as for Eleanor's support - I'd expect nothing less from the most biased of the moderation team - watch the last sentence disappear....

You missed the “I don’t think are true” bit in Davel’s post.

[jassi]

When you state that a poster is wrong, or has a ridiculous stance, then, by default, you are stating that your take on it is correct, ergo, you're stating opinion as fact. Surely you can see the irony of your accusation.
You 'cannot help but respond' because you think your opinion is fact. And as for Eleanor's support - I'd expect nothing less from the most biased of the moderation team - watch the last sentence disappear....

Come come now, surely that honour lies elsewhere

[The General]

You missed the “I don’t think are true” bit in Davel’s post.

I didn't, that's the point. The 'I'm right, you're wrong' position is default 'my opinion is more valid than yours'.

[Venturi Swirl]

I didn't, that's the point. The 'I'm right, you're wrong' position is default 'my opinion is more valid than yours'.

No, he’s stating that in his opinion he is right, not stating a fact.  IMO.