McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Icanhandlethetruth]

To be fair, claiming he can prove something as a fact goes beyond mere opinion, surely?

Not really, its his opinion that he can prove it from his hypothesis of the evidence.

[Eleanor]

I can hardly wait for The ECHR.  What a hoot that is going to be.

[Mr Gray]

Once again it doesn’t quite state that does it?  It actually states that subsequent civil proceedings (mainly compensatory) to criminal proceedings, the presumption of innocence does not apply. The key word is subsequent. The meaning is totally different from your implication.

"Nevertheless, the Court of Justice of the European Union has decided that the principle of presumption of innocence does not apply to subsequent civil proceedings (mainly compensatory) to criminal proceedings, at risk of depriving the victim of her own right to accede to the courts and to be compensated (Cf. the judgements in Y vi's Norvvay (56568/00) of 11/ 5/2003 and Diacendo vs Italy (124/04) of 05/07/2012)."

I'm fairly sure I know what it means.. Why do you think the SC mentioned it when afaiac it has no relavenve to this case.. Did they misunderstand it..
To me that can be the only explanation

[Mr Gray]

I can hardly wait for The ECHR.  What a hoot that is going to be.

I agree.. I've looked at a lot of law and past cases... The McCanns seem to have a very strong case

[Icanhandlethetruth]

I'm fairly sure I know what it means.. Why do you think the SC mentioned it when afaiac it has no relavenve to this case.. Did they misunderstand it..
To me that can be the only explanation

You really are priceless., That you presume to know more about Portuguese legal matters than Portuguese Supreme Court judges in a Portuguese court. But I will humour you, why did they mention it then?

[Venturi Swirl]

Not really, its his opinion that he can prove it from his hypothesis of the evidence.

So if he claimed he saw Gerry carrying Madeleine's body through PdL then that would be opinion too.  When is making any statement not an opinion?

[Icanhandlethetruth]

So if he claimed he saw Gerry carrying Madeleine's body through PdL then that would be opinion too.  When is making any statement not an opinion?

How can it be opinion, he is stating a fact that he saw Gerry not a hypothesis from the archiving report that he based his book on. The book is opinion, the SC ruled that, you don’t have to agree with the verdict but please accept it happened.

[Eleanor]

I agree.. I've looked at a lot of law and past cases... The McCanns seem to have a very strong case

With my past experience I am pretty certain that I can rely on Supporters to behave with decorum.

[Eleanor]

You really are priceless., That you presume to know more about Portuguese legal matters than Portuguese Supreme Court judges in a Portuguese court. But I will humour you, why did they mention it then?

We all know far too much about Portuguese Supreme Court Judges.

[The General]

With my past experience I am pretty certain that I can rely on Supporters to behave with decorum.

Let's hope they do, eh, given the depths plumbed thus far.

[Mr Gray]

You really are priceless., That you presume to know more about Portuguese legal matters than Portuguese Supreme Court judges in a Portuguese court. But I will humour you, why did they mention it then?

Do you accept its not relevant to this case.. If it isn't then why mention it.
If the Mcccanns win then it looks as though I do understand the law better. Portugal success rate for accepted cases at the ECHR  is 4 %.. That doesn't look too good

[The General]

Do you accept its not relevant to this case.. If it isn't then why mention it.
If the Mcccanns win then it looks as though I do understand the law better. Portugal success rate for accepted cases at the ECHR  is 4 %.. That doesn't look too good

So they're due a win. Positive signs.

[Mr Gray]

How can it be opinion, he is stating a fact that he saw Gerry not a hypothesis from the archiving report that he based his book on. The book is opinion, the SC ruled that, you don’t have to agree with the verdict but please accept it happened.

Of course the book is opinion... But is it honest opinion and does that rule apply. In Portugal. The ECHR seem to have a similar principle to it but Amaral falls far short of it.
It may be opinion but he's stating it as fact. Opinion can be defamatory

[Eleanor]

Let's hope they do, eh, given the depths plumbed thus far.

Keep on digging.

[Venturi Swirl]

How can it be opinion, he is stating a fact that he saw Gerry not a hypothesis from the archiving report that he based his book on. The book is opinion, the SC ruled that, you don’t have to agree with the verdict but please accept it happened.

He stated as fact that he could prove Madeleine died in the apartment did he not?  So it's not an opinion.   You could argue that if he says "I saw Gerry" it was only his opinion he saw Gerry and he may have been mistaken.  How do you decide what is and isn't someone's opinion?