McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Mr Gray]

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....

If you look at my post it says I think you are wrong... And I do.
All my posts, are qualified by imo.
None of us know 100% how the ECHR will pan out. I give my opinion and make it clear it's my opinion.

Gunit seems to think her view is factual... That's what I'm pointing out

[Mr Gray]

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

You are, wrong again... The value of opinion is not whi makes it but on what evidence it is based... This us something I've posted before.  My opinion Re the ECHR is based in cases I've quoted.  Posters can look at the links I've given and make their own mind up

[The General]

If you look at my post it says I think you are wrong... And I do.
All my posts, are qualified by imo.
None of us know 100% how the ECHR will pan out. I give my opinion and make it clear it's my opinion.

Gunit seems to think her view is factual... That's what I'm pointing out

We'll hopefully find out some time in 2022.

[The General]

You are, wrong again... The value of opinion is not whi makes it but on what evidence it is based... This us something I've posted before.  My opinion Re the ECHR is based in cases I've quoted.  Posters can look at the links I've given and make their own mind up

They have made their own mind up; they think you're wrong.

[Mr Gray]

They have made their own mind up; they think you're wrong.

And I don't have the slightest problem with that as long as it's stated as opinion... Not fact... As gunit has done.  I don't understand  how you fail to see such an obviously simple point

[Mr Gray]

We'll hopefully find out some time in 2022.

I agree that 2022 is a reasonable estimate... But who knows

[G-Unit]

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

A) The claimants, concerning the pertinence of the trial, invoke that their constitutionally guaranteed rights are superior to the eventual freedom of expression that the defendants may benefit of, that the book and remaining pieces gathered in this suit are not information and aim at transforming the theory of their involvement in the death of the claimant Madeleine and the concealment of her body in the “result “ of the criminal investigation, and that Goncalo Amaral violated his duties as a State servant to which he was constrained being an inspector of the Judicial Police. (page 7)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0

I wonder what happened to this threat?

Madeleine McCann's parents will lodge a complaint with Portuguese police alleging that former detective Goncalo Amaral broke his country's strict judicial secrecy laws, the couple's lawyer said.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/6995024/Madeleine-McCanns-parents-to-lodge-complaint-against-Portuguese-police.html

[Mr Gray]

A) The claimants, concerning the pertinence of the trial, invoke that their constitutionally guaranteed rights are superior to the eventual freedom of expression that the defendants may benefit of, that the book and remaining pieces gathered in this suit are not information and aim at transforming the theory of their involvement in the death of the claimant Madeleine and the concealment of her body in the “result “ of the criminal investigation, and that Goncalo Amaral violated his duties as a State servant to which he was constrained being an inspector of the Judicial Police. (page 7)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0

I wonder what happened to this threat?

Madeleine McCann's parents will lodge a complaint with Portuguese police alleging that former detective Goncalo Amaral broke his country's strict judicial secrecy laws, the couple's lawyer said.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/6995024/Madeleine-McCanns-parents-to-lodge-complaint-against-Portuguese-police.html

Again I'm not sure, what the point if your post is... The mccanns have raised their right to reputation and right to the presumption of innocence.  They raised these specifically to the SC.... So I  can't see any way their right to appeal to the ECHR is not valid

[G-Unit]

Again I'm not sure, what the point if your post is... The mccanns have raised their right to reputation and right to the presumption of innocence.  They raised these specifically to the SC.... So I  can't see any way their right to appeal to the ECHR is not valid

So how was their right to the presumption of innocence damaged? Was it because Amaral breached the duty of reserve, or was it because the archiving dispatch was equal to an acquittal? They used both arguments and the courts rejected both.

[The General]

And I don't have the slightest problem with that as long as it's stated as opinion... Not fact... As gunit has done.  I don't understand  how you fail to see such an obviously simple point

I can't understand how you fail to see my point, etc, etc, blah. You've been banging the 'I'm Always Right' drum for 11 years.
You've been put back in your box by G-Unit, get over it.

[Eleanor]

I can't understand how you fail to see my point, etc, etc, blah. You've been banging the 'I'm Always Right' drum for 11 years.
You've been put back in your box by G-Unit, get over it.

In Your Opinion, which I don't agree with.

[Mr Gray]

So how was their right to the presumption of innocence damaged? Was it because Amaral breached the duty of reserve, or was it because the archiving dispatch was equal to an acquittal? They used both arguments and the courts rejected both.

It's up to the, ECHR to decide those points.. Not us

[Robittybob1]

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

Interesting little debate, so what do I think?

As soon as you say "I think I'm right" it seems like you are presenting your opinion as a fact.  But I must admit even I would fall into that trap, so I'm going to let it go. 

[Robittybob1]

Again I'm not sure, what the point if your post is... The mccanns have raised their right to reputation and right to the presumption of innocence.  They raised these specifically to the SC.... So I  can't see any way their right to appeal to the ECHR is not valid

G-unit was showing that the McCanns were aware of the "Duty of Reserve". 

[Eleanor]

G-unit was showing that the McCanns were aware of the "Duty of Reserve".

So any Police Officer can say what he likes without proof?  There's interesting.