McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Mr Gray]

We have all aired our opinions until someone has something new to bring to the discussion maybe have a break.

we have all aired our views on many topics ...such as leaving the children....48 questions...and many more...but no request for a break there...why are you suggesting it here

[Mr Gray]

Wrong Davel.

Believe what you wish. It won't change a thing.

logic would say that if you had some professional advice that supported your view you would want to share it...to show me where I am wrong. The information I have received is supportive of my view

[Mr Gray]

Cornell Law School's site references this Nolo 'Plain English Law Dictionary" with this definition: nolo.com/dictionary/public-figure-term.html Public Figure: A person of great public interest or familiarity, such as a government official, politician, celebrity, business leader, movie star, or sports hero. Incorrect harmful statements published about a public figure cannot be the basis of a lawsuit for defamation unless there is proof that the writer or publisher intentionally defamed the person with malice

[slartibartfast]

we have all aired our views on many topics ...such as leaving the children....48 questions...and many more...but no request for a break there...why are you suggesting it here

Because it isn’t getting anywhere.

[slartibartfast]

Cornell Law School's site references this Nolo 'Plain English Law Dictionary" with this definition: nolo.com/dictionary/public-figure-term.html Public Figure: A person of great public interest or familiarity, such as a government official, politician, celebrity, business leader, movie star, or sports hero. Incorrect harmful statements published about a public figure cannot be the basis of a lawsuit for defamation unless there is proof that the writer or publisher intentionally defamed the person with malice

US based.

[Mr Gray]

Because it isn’t getting anywhere.

neither are the other threads...48 questions...leaving the children alone...10 years and still exactly the same...imo

[Mr Gray]

US based.

but it makes a point...something new to discuss on this thread...the SC judgeemnt makes a lot re the mccanns as public figures......is it justified

[G-Unit]

my opinion is that the mccanns right to reputation has suffered by amarals claims...defamation....thats where the  claim will focus..imo... I also believe that absence of evidence is evidence of innocence...a claim denied by the SC

How did Amaral's claims damage the McCann's right to reputation? His book said nothing new. it had all been said before, as the first judge commented;

Now the thesis that the minor died accidentally in the apartment and that this fact was hidden by her parents, who spread and fed, in order to deceive, an hypothesis of abduction, is not new, there's nothing new neither in the book, in the interview or in the documentary.

One wonders then what is the difference between 1) asserting – as it was done at a certain step of the investigation or as many commentators do – that there are indices of accidental death, concealment of the corpse and simulation of crime and 2) supporting this view as did the defendant Goncalo Amaral in those three mediums.
Page 34 http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0

The only difference in my opinion is that the McCanns chose to sue him. What's the difference in your opinion?

[Mr Gray]

How did Amaral's claims damage the McCann's right to reputation? His book said nothing new. it had all been said before, as the first judge commented;

Now the thesis that the minor died accidentally in the apartment and that this fact was hidden by her parents, who spread and fed, in order to deceive, an hypothesis of abduction, is not new, there's nothing new neither in the book, in the interview or in the documentary.

One wonders then what is the difference between 1) asserting – as it was done at a certain step of the investigation or as many commentators do – that there are indices of accidental death, concealment of the corpse and simulation of crime and 2) supporting this view as did the defendant Goncalo Amaral in those three mediums.
Page 34 http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0

The only difference in my opinion is that the McCanns chose to sue him. What's the difference in your opinion?

amaral claimed he could prove his thesis..that isnt in the files

[Brietta]

wrong iyo

the fact they placed themselves in the public eye does not make them public figures...imo

I must confess that I hadn't given the 'public figure' expression much thought in this age of instant celebrity; a quick check of the Oxford Dictionary defines a public figure as "A person known of by the general public".
Therefore making the appeal court judges technically correct.

In common with the parents of all missing children, Kate and Gerry become known to the public ... I suppose the European Court might consider how prejudicial penalising them for that might be?

[stephen25000]

amaral claimed he could prove his thesis..that isnt in the files

It is nothing to do with Amaral anymore.

Please keep to the facts, such as they are.and

[Mr Gray]

It is nothing to do with Amaral anymore.

Please keep to the facts, such as they are.and

It is to do with defamation by amaral.....

[G-Unit]

amaral claimed he could prove his thesis..that isnt in the files

How does that contribute to a claim that the state of Portugal breached their human rights?

[Mr Gray]

How does that contribute to a claim that the state of Portugal breached their human rights?

Simple...the SC have allowed amaral to defame the McCanns

I would think amaral and his claims will figure a great deal in the action to ECHR

[G-Unit]

I must confess that I hadn't given the 'public figure' expression much thought in this age of instant celebrity; a quick check of the Oxford Dictionary defines a public figure as "A person known of by the general public".
Therefore making the appeal court judges technically correct.

In common with the parents of all missing children, Kate and Gerry become known to the public ... I suppose the European Court might consider how prejudicial penalising them for that might be?

The McCanns became much better known than other parents, largely due to their own willingness to inform and engage with the media.