McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[slartibartfast]

Whoever found that page knew the application number.

But didn’t want to share.

[Mr Gray]

But didn’t want to share.

it does put to bed the belief of some that no application had been made or it had already been declared inadmissable

[G-Unit]

it does put to bed the belief of some that no application had been made or it had already been declared inadmissable

Did people express a belief that no application had been made or did they point out (correctly) that there was no evidence that the application had been submitted? There is a clear difference between the two.

[Venturi Swirl]

Did people express a belief that no application had been made or did they point out (correctly) that there was no evidence that the application had been submitted? There is a clear difference between the two.

There was evidence the application had been submitted, most sceptics preferred to dismiss it.

[Mr Gray]

Did people express a belief that no application had been made or did they point out (correctly) that there was no evidence that the application had been submitted? There is a clear difference between the two.

I know there's, a difference.. But there was evidence the application had been submitted... They just refused  to accept it...

[Mr Gray]

There was evidence the application had been submitted, most sceptics preferred to dismiss it.

Snap

[G-Unit]

There was evidence the application had been submitted, most sceptics preferred to dismiss it.

So did anyone say they believed the application hadn't been submitted or was that simply your interpretation?

[Mr Gray]

So did anyone say they believed the application hadn't been submitted or was that simply your interpretation?

Why us it so important... You know it was doubted... Damage limitation now?

There, was this from a skeptic..


Precisely.

It is all pie in the sky and par for the McCann'S trying yet again, delaying tactics.

And..

i  think the mcanns  are addicted to the attention  they   get everybody knows   this   wont happen and yet supporters  lap it up  all imo

[Mr Gray]

So did anyone say they believed the application hadn't been submitted or was that simply your interpretation?

This is what YOU said previously..



The presumption of innocence applies to criminal, not civil proceedings. The judges pointed this out and referred to ECHR cases where the ECHR made the same point.



Looks Like you and the SC are quite wrong

[Robittybob1]

This is what YOU said previously..



The presumption of innocence applies to criminal, not civil proceedings. The judges pointed this out and referred to ECHR cases where the ECHR made the same point.



Looks Like you and the SC are quite wrong

You have come to a conclusion without providing an argument.

[G-Unit]

This is what YOU said previously..



The presumption of innocence applies to criminal, not civil proceedings. The judges pointed this out and referred to ECHR cases where the ECHR made the same point.



Looks Like you and the SC are quite wrong

That isn't an answer to my question.

[Venturi Swirl]

So did anyone say they believed the application hadn't been submitted or was that simply your interpretation?

Almost certainly they did, do you want me to read every single post on the subject to prove my point?

[Mr Gray]

You have come to a conclusion without providing an argument.

I've provided a cite from the ECHR which proves what I have, said.. Read back... It's gunit who has made unsubstantiated claims.. More unfair harrassment  rob... Lol

[Mr Gray]

That isn't an answer to my question.

I've already answered both your questions..

[Venturi Swirl]

Do you seriously imagine Brietta, that the McCann's can take their case, be accepted, and take the state of Portugal to court, after what they have done in and to Portugal ?

Here’s someone who seemed somewhat scepictal, does this count, or are the goalposts about to be shifted again?