McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Brietta]

Sadly, imo, I think the McCanns were seen, not least in the eyes of Amaral & PJ, to be using the media to promote  Madeleine's disappearance only as abduction almost from the beginning. Rightly or wrongly, I think the courts considered Amaral's opinion of events, via his book based on PJ files, carried equal weight in the absence of proven truth.
The McCanns had little choice other than to use the media if they were to stand any chance of finding Madeleine. We are fully aware of the legal restrictions placed on PJ in relation to media and secrecy but many people, including the McCanns, found ways to circumvent both this and libel laws irrespective of the nature of their opinions.
Having followed Nicola Bulley's case it's apparent what harm publicity and free speech can be done to a victim, their family and the police personnel who have the unenviable task of investigating someone's disappearance. Words shouldn't be more important than actions but we seem to be moving towards a society in which there are ever-increasing repercussions for expressing our viewpoint.

Despite the alleged secrecy of Portuguese investigation the McCanns had the worst possible press foisted upon them right from the word “Go!”.   All of which had an impact because the gossip emanated from impeccable sources within the investigation all of which was designed to present the McCanns and their friends in the worst possible light.

To me, whatever thoughts Amaral and the PJ had were not for publication in the public domain – in the first instance that was not only a breach of professionalism, it was a breach in the law.
Amaral's job was not to be judge and jury - his job was to find out what happened using evidence and not his fertile but badly directed imagination.

So basically the McCanns did not have the protection of Portuguese law in the beginning which resulted in them ultimately not having the protection of the ECHR.

[Wonderfulspam]

Despite the alleged secrecy of Portuguese investigation the McCanns had the worst possible press foisted upon them right from the word “Go!”.   All of which had an impact because the gossip emanated from impeccable sources within the investigation all of which was designed to present the McCanns and their friends in the worst possible light.

To me, whatever thoughts Amaral and the PJ had were not for publication in the public domain – in the first instance that was not only a breach of professionalism, it was a breach in the law.
Amaral's job was not to be judge and jury - his job was to find out what happened using evidence and not his fertile but badly directed imagination.

So basically the McCanns did not have the protection of Portuguese law in the beginning which resulted in them ultimately not having the protection of the ECHR.

Perhaps if Maddie had been given the protection of her parents, maybe all of the above could have been avoided.

[Brietta]

Sadly, imo, I think the McCanns were seen, not least in the eyes of Amaral & PJ, to be using the media to promote  Madeleine's disappearance only as abduction almost from the beginning. Rightly or wrongly, I think the courts considered Amaral's opinion of events, via his book based on PJ files, carried equal weight in the absence of proven truth.
The McCanns had little choice other than to use the media if they were to stand any chance of finding Madeleine. We are fully aware of the legal restrictions placed on PJ in relation to media and secrecy but many people, including the McCanns, found ways to circumvent both this and libel laws irrespective of the nature of their opinions.
Having followed Nicola Bulley's case it's apparent what harm publicity and free speech can be done to a victim, their family and the police personnel who have the unenviable task of investigating someone's disappearance. Words shouldn't be more important than actions but we seem to be moving towards a society in which there are ever-increasing repercussions for expressing our viewpoint.

The thing is that Portuguese law did allow the use of the media in particular circumstances ~ one of which was in the case of a missing child.

Amaral knew this.  In fact he sought the permissions to release information about Madeleine.  That could probably be classed as a "proven fact" which is recorded in the files.

[Mr Gray]

What does no violation mean in Mr Gray land then.

Conclusion(s)
No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 - Positive obligations
Article 8-1 - Respect for private life)

You've taken it out of context....Could you post it in context....accusing someone of a criminal act is libel per se.

there was neevr any question Amarals claims were not defamatory....even in the SC judgement

[Brietta]

The ECHR judges, just like the Portuguese ones, understood why the McCanns opted to become public figures. Whatever their motives were, it was still a fact that they did so and that had consequences.

What an insulting nonsense!

The McCanns did not "opt to become public figures" or anything of the sort.

Parents of missing children or missing people opt only to have their missing relative looked for!

[Brietta]

Friday 4th May 2007 'Please, if you have Madeleine, let her come home...' said Gerry McCann in a media appeal. He made it about abduction immediately and he used the media to spread his opinion.

Just another absurd post illustrating how abandoned and alone the family of a missing child were in the search for that top priority in a missing child case -  INFORMATION!

When have you ever seen the broken parents of a missing child anywhere in the world reduced to desperation of standing in the dark using torchlight to make their heart rending appeal.
The police were not helping or giving advice as they should have been.  You really downplay as much as it is humanly possible to do so the absolutely abominable treatment meted out to the McCanns at the worst time of their lives.

Just an aside - the parallels with the Cipriano case are uncanny.  Joana's mum was criticised for having flyers made and publicising her missing child too.  Seems to have been a Portugeuse thing of the time.

[Venturi Swirl]

Friday 4th May 2007 'Please, if you have Madeleine, let her come home...' said Gerry McCann in a media appeal. He made it about abduction immediately and he used the media to spread his opinion.

As do most parents of missing children - so what?

[Venturi Swirl]

What an insulting nonsense!

The McCanns did not "opt to become public figures" or anything of the sort.

Parents of missing children or missing people opt only to have their missing relative looked for!

Can you imagine if the McCanns had shunned the media instead?  As if doing so would have elevated them in the eyes of their detractors, instead it would simply have added even more fuel to the fire.  Basically the McCanns can do no right as far as these armchair critics are concerned.

[Mr Gray]

Just another absurd post illustrating how abandoned and alone the family of a missing child were in the search for that top priority in a missing child case -  INFORMATION!

When have you ever seen the broken parents of a missing child anywhere in the world reduced to desperation of standing in the dark using torchlight to make their heart rending appeal.
The police were not helping or giving advice as they should have been.  You really downplay as much as it is humanly possible to do so the absolutely abominable treatment meted out to the McCanns at the worst time of their lives.

Just an aside - the parallels with the Cipriano case are uncanny.  Joana's mum was criticised for having flyers made and publicising her missing child too.  Seems to have been a Portugeuse thing of the time.

also a proven fact that joannas blood was found in the fridge...when it wasnt

Can you imagine the kerfuffle if Wolters claimed it was a proven fact CB used his phone outside the OC on the evening of the abduction....

[Mr Gray]

Can you imagine if the McCanns had shunned the media instead?  As if doing so would have elevated them in the eyes of their detractors, instead it would simply have added even more fuel to the fire.  Basically the McCanns can do no right as far as these armchair critics are concerned.

its a proven fact that CB came to be the prime suspect because of a public appea by the mccanns

[Wonderfulspam]

Just another absurd post illustrating how abandoned and alone the family of a missing child were in the search for that top priority in a missing child case -  INFORMATION!

When have you ever seen the broken parents of a missing child anywhere in the world reduced to desperation of standing in the dark using torchlight to make their heart rending appeal.
The police were not helping or giving advice as they should have been.  You really downplay as much as it is humanly possible to do so the absolutely abominable treatment meted out to the McCanns at the worst time of their lives.

Just an aside - the parallels with the Cipriano case are uncanny.  Joana's mum was criticised for having flyers made and publicising her missing child too.  Seems to have been a Portugeuse thing of the time.

I didn't find their performance at all convincing myself.

[Wonderfulspam]

Can you imagine if the McCanns had shunned the media instead?  As if doing so would have elevated them in the eyes of their detractors, instead it would simply have added even more fuel to the fire.  Basically the McCanns can do no right as far as these armchair critics are concerned.

Well, they were wrong to pursue Amaral through the courts certainly.

[Wonderfulspam]

its a proven fact that CB came to be the prime suspect because of a public appea by the mccanns

Which pubic appea was that?

[Venturi Swirl]

Sadly, imo, I think the McCanns were seen, not least in the eyes of Amaral & PJ, to be using the media to promote  Madeleine's disappearance only as abduction almost from the beginning. Rightly or wrongly, I think the courts considered Amaral's opinion of events, via his book based on PJ files, carried equal weight in the absence of proven truth.
The McCanns had little choice other than to use the media if they were to stand any chance of finding Madeleine. We are fully aware of the legal restrictions placed on PJ in relation to media and secrecy but many people, including the McCanns, found ways to circumvent both this and libel laws irrespective of the nature of their opinions.
Having followed Nicola Bulley's case it's apparent what harm publicity and free speech can be done to a victim, their family and the police personnel who have the unenviable task of investigating someone's disappearance. Words shouldn't be more important than actions but we seem to be moving towards a society in which there are ever-increasing repercussions for expressing our viewpoint.

Of course Nicola Bulley's partner put in a wholly unconvincing appeal for her to come home according to some of the Armchair Defectives I have read online.  In fact there are still some numpties who cling to the hope that he was somehow involved despite the complete absence of evidence to support this idiotic theory and the fact that all the evidence points to Nicola getting into the river herself.  Some people always like to think they know better than anyone else and will happily reveal themselves as the nasty, spiteful idiots they are online (just so long as they can remain anonymous of course). 

[barrier]

I used to like him as a footballer, now I hate him all round, because I couldn't disagree more with his political leaning. What's more, he likes to seem holier than thou, but in reality, he advertised Walkers crisps for years, disgustingly unhealthy junk food. I dread to think how many people have died from high cholesterol & obesity because of him.

He won the golden boot in Mexico 1986, thats it, how that qualifies to be a mouth piece who knows.