McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[stephen25000]

"In a last ditch bid to prevent them from paying out and to clear their names, the couple lodged an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights in July."

I think you said as much yesterday Stephen, well anticipated.

I did John.

However, they have to pay up.

It's nothing to do with the E.C.H.R.

If they don't, the Portuguese will pursue them to recover the fees due.

[Brietta]

"In a last ditch bid to prevent them from paying out and to clear their names, the couple lodged an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights in July."

I think you said as much yesterday Stephen, well anticipated.  Clearly money is a significant factor here.

"It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case. In truth, that ruling was not made in virtue of Portugal's Public Prosecution Service having acquired the conviction that the appellants hadn't committed a crime.

"The archiving of the case was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes by the appellants.

"There is therefore a significant, and not merely a semantic difference, between the legally admissible foundations of the archive ruling. It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence."

They added: "It's true that the aforementioned criminal inquiry ended up being archived, namely because none of the apparent evidence that led to the appellants being made 'arguidos' was subsequently confirmed or consolidated.

"However even the archive ruling raises serious concerns relating to the truth of the allegation that Madeleine was kidnapped."
Portuguese Supreme Court judges


In my opinion the above content in the ruling by the judges sitting in the Portuguese appeal court almost certainly guaranteed that Kate and Gerry McCann would make an approach to the European Court of Human Rights for their case to be considered.

In my opinion the wording of that judgement indicates that their application to be heard by the ECHR will be accepted.

If their application proceeds it is my opinion the wording of that judgement ensures that the McCanns will almost certainly win their case in the European Court.

In my opinion the wording of the ruling made by the Portuguese judges was a game changer the ultimate consequence of which will not be as the authors intended.  Unlike the sceptics who at the time rejoiced at the inclusion, I thought it was an entirely unnecessary step too far.
I think that will prove to be the case.  Brilliant in the short term but not well thought through to the long term.

If the case is to be heard, it will only remain to be seen what the wording of the complaint the McCann legal team presents to the court will be.

The McCanns can safely be associated with that legal representation.  They absolutely cannot be associated with the ramblings of tabloids and broadsheets.
It is patently wrong to do so.


EU strengthens right to the presumption of innocence
According to the directive, member states will have to ensure that suspects and accused persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty under the law. The Directive provides two rights linked to this principle: the right to remain silent and the right not to incriminate oneself. In addition, member states will have to respect the following related obligations: before the final judgement, suspects and accused persons should not to be presented as being guilty through the use of measures of physical restraint and the burden of proof is on the prosecution while any reasonable doubts as to the guilt should benefit the accused.  The right to be present at one's trial is also addressed by this directive.

Moreover, member states will have to ensure that suspects and accused persons have an effective remedy if their rights under this directive are breached.
http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/PE-63-2015-INIT/en/pdf

[stephen25000]

"It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case. In truth, that ruling was not made in virtue of Portugal's Public Prosecution Service having acquired the conviction that the appellants hadn't committed a crime.

"The archiving of the case was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes by the appellants.

"There is therefore a significant, and not merely a semantic difference, between the legally admissible foundations of the archive ruling. It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence."

They added: "It's true that the aforementioned criminal inquiry ended up being archived, namely because none of the apparent evidence that led to the appellants being made 'arguidos' was subsequently confirmed or consolidated.

"However even the archive ruling raises serious concerns relating to the truth of the allegation that Madeleine was kidnapped."
Portuguese Supreme Court judges


In my opinion the above content in the ruling by the judges sitting in the Portuguese appeal court almost certainly guaranteed that Kate and Gerry McCann would make an approach to the European Court of Human Rights for their case to be considered.

In my opinion the wording of that judgement indicates that their application to be heard by the ECHR will be accepted.

If their application proceeds it is my opinion the wording of that judgement ensures that the McCanns will almost certainly win their case in the European Court.

In my opinion the wording of the ruling made by the Portuguese judges was a game changer the ultimate consequence of which will not be as the authors intended.  Unlike the sceptics who at the time rejoiced at the inclusion, I thought it was an entirely unnecessary step too far.
I think that will prove to be the case.  Brilliant in the short term but not well thought through to the long term.

If the case is to be heard, it will only remain to be seen what the wording of the complaint the McCann legal team presents to the court will be.

The McCanns can safely be associated with that legal representation.  They absolutely cannot be associated with the ramblings of tabloids and broadsheets.
It is patently wrong to do so.


EU strengthens right to the presumption of innocence
According to the directive, member states will have to ensure that suspects and accused persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty under the law. The Directive provides two rights linked to this principle: the right to remain silent and the right not to incriminate oneself. In addition, member states will have to respect the following related obligations: before the final judgement, suspects and accused persons should not to be presented as being guilty through the use of measures of physical restraint and the burden of proof is on the prosecution while any reasonable doubts as to the guilt should benefit the accused.  The right to be present at one's trial is also addressed by this directive.

Moreover, member states will have to ensure that suspects and accused persons have an effective remedy if their rights under this directive are breached.
http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/PE-63-2015-INIT/en/pdf

The case was brought against Amaral, not the Mccann's.

You seem to have forgotten that key point.

The Supreme Court Judgement was made in respect of a E.C.H. R.'s case.

Have you forgotten that too?

Who was the source of this story ???

The name is given.

[G-Unit]

"It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case. In truth, that ruling was not made in virtue of Portugal's Public Prosecution Service having acquired the conviction that the appellants hadn't committed a crime.

"The archiving of the case was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes by the appellants.

"There is therefore a significant, and not merely a semantic difference, between the legally admissible foundations of the archive ruling. It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence."

They added: "It's true that the aforementioned criminal inquiry ended up being archived, namely because none of the apparent evidence that led to the appellants being made 'arguidos' was subsequently confirmed or consolidated.

"However even the archive ruling raises serious concerns relating to the truth of the allegation that Madeleine was kidnapped."
Portuguese Supreme Court judges


In my opinion the above content in the ruling by the judges sitting in the Portuguese appeal court almost certainly guaranteed that Kate and Gerry McCann would make an approach to the European Court of Human Rights for their case to be considered.

In my opinion the wording of that judgement indicates that their application to be heard by the ECHR will be accepted.

If their application proceeds it is my opinion the wording of that judgement ensures that the McCanns will almost certainly win their case in the European Court.

In my opinion the wording of the ruling made by the Portuguese judges was a game changer the ultimate consequence of which will not be as the authors intended.  Unlike the sceptics who at the time rejoiced at the inclusion, I thought it was an entirely unnecessary step too far.
I think that will prove to be the case.  Brilliant in the short term but not well thought through to the long term.

If the case is to be heard, it will only remain to be seen what the wording of the complaint the McCann legal team presents to the court will be.

The McCanns can safely be associated with that legal representation.  They absolutely cannot be associated with the ramblings of tabloids and broadsheets.
It is patently wrong to do so.


EU strengthens right to the presumption of innocence
According to the directive, member states will have to ensure that suspects and accused persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty under the law. The Directive provides two rights linked to this principle: the right to remain silent and the right not to incriminate oneself. In addition, member states will have to respect the following related obligations: before the final judgement, suspects and accused persons should not to be presented as being guilty through the use of measures of physical restraint and the burden of proof is on the prosecution while any reasonable doubts as to the guilt should benefit the accused.  The right to be present at one's trial is also addressed by this directive.

Moreover, member states will have to ensure that suspects and accused persons have an effective remedy if their rights under this directive are breached.
http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/PE-63-2015-INIT/en/pdf

The Supreme Court judges didn't deny the McCann's right to the presumption of innocence if that's what your post is saying. They denied them the right to use the archiving dispatch as proof of their innocence.

[Montclair]

"In a last ditch bid to prevent them from paying out and to clear their names, the couple lodged an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights in July."

I think you said as much yesterday Stephen, well anticipated.  Clearly money is a significant factor here.

The McCanns clearly expected, when they sued Gonçalo Amaral, to receive a million euros and make him miserable and feel fear. Now they can't bear the fact that they lost, he won and that they have to pay him and the other defendants for their court and legal costs. I was told that the McCanns want the ECHR to order a retrial because the judges were biased! I hope that their lawyers explained to them what this is not within the remit of the ECHR.

[stephen25000]

The McCanns clearly expected, when they sued Gonçalo Amaral, to receive a million euros and make him miserable and feel fear. Now they can't bear the fact that they lost, he won and that they have to pay him and the other defendants for their court and legal costs. I was told that the McCanns want the ECHR to order a retrial because the judges were biased! I hope that their lawyers explained to them what this is not within the remit of the ECHR.

Well, I have heard everything now.

Just how foolish are the Mccanns.

[G-Unit]

The McCanns clearly expected, when they sued Gonçalo Amaral, to receive a million euros and make him miserable and feel fear. Now they can't bear the fact that they lost, he won and that they have to pay him and the other defendants for their court and legal costs. I was told that the McCanns want the ECHR to order a retrial because the judges were biased! I hope that their lawyers explained to them what this is not within the remit of the ECHR.

How many judges have been biased, I wonder? Five appeal court judges and up to five Supreme Court judges have been involved in this case. They unanimously rejected the McCann's claims.

[Brietta]

The Supreme Court judges didn't deny the McCann's right to the presumption of innocence if that's what your post is saying. They denied them the right to use the archiving dispatch as proof of their innocence.

I'm not sure whether or not the European Court of Human Rights takes semantics into consideration.  I am certain though that what they do consider are points of law.

[Brietta]

The McCanns clearly expected, when they sued Gonçalo Amaral, to receive a million euros and make him miserable and feel fear. Now they can't bear the fact that they lost, he won and that they have to pay him and the other defendants for their court and legal costs. I was told that the McCanns want the ECHR to order a retrial because the judges were biased! I hope that their lawyers explained to them what this is not within the remit of the ECHR.

Please remember the protocol of stating what is your opinion or speculation and what is fact.

I doubt very much if the McCanns or their legal team either consulted or informed you of anything concerning the legal case they intend to take to the European Court of Human Rights.

In my opinion you need have no fears either about the McCann knowledge of what the European court does or what it does not do, nor need you concern yourself with what may have been discussed with their legal representatives.

[Brietta]

How many judges have been biased, I wonder? Five appeal court judges and up to five Supreme Court judges have been involved in this case. They unanimously rejected the McCann's claims.

In my opinion it all depends very much on how the judges in the European Court view the matter of the abrogation of the McCann Human Rights by the learned Portuguese judges.

All will be revealed in the fullness of time.

[stephen25000]

In my opinion it all depends very much on how the judges in the European Court view the matter of the abrogation of the McCann Human Rights by the learned Portuguese judges.

All will be revealed in the fullness of time.

You forget, a case has to be accepted.

There was no loss of the Mccann's human rights.

They brought a case and lost.

It's time they got over that, and pay what they owe.

Otherwise, they will be the ones pursued in court.

[faithlilly]

This is my take on what is happening now.

With the judgement of the SC, reported in every British newspaper, the McCanns can't be seen to be doing nothing to overturn that judgement. Of course we who are interested in the case know that no matter what the ECHR decide, and the McCanns still have to have their application accepted, it will not make an iota of difference to the SC judgement however the average tabloid reader wouldn't and this is who these articles are targeted at.

IMO the McCanns are well aware that their application will not succeed and these articles are merely a holding manoeuvre, printed in the knowledge that your average tabloid reader has a very, very short memory.

[Alice Purjorick]

In my opinion it all depends very much on how the judges in the European Court view the matter of the abrogation of the McCann Human Rights by the learned Portuguese judges.

All will be revealed in the fullness of time.

The initial application will be reviewed by a single judge who will rule on its admissibilty. If he rules the application is inadmissible that's it end of the line, there is no appeal against it.
There are then potentially two stages after that.

[G-Unit]

I'm not sure whether or not the European Court of Human Rights takes semantics into consideration.  I am certain though that what they do consider are points of law.

In this case they will be asked to decide if Portugal violated any of the McCann's rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.

I don't know which of their human rights they feel have been violated, but two have been mentioned during the various proceedings; Article 10 concerning freedom of expression and Article 6:2 concerning the presumption of innocence.

Freedom of expression allows people to give their opinion so long as certain restrictions are observed. The various judges found that Amaral didn't breach any of those restrictions.

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.

I don't know what 'semantics' are being referred to.

[slartibartfast]

Please remember the protocol of stating what is your opinion or speculation and what is fact.

I doubt very much if the McCanns or their legal team either consulted or informed you of anything concerning the legal case they intend to take to the European Court of Human Rights.

In my opinion you need have no fears either about the McCann knowledge of what the European court does or what it does not do, nor need you concern yourself with what may have been discussed with their legal representatives.

IMO the McCanns legal team have not previously covered themselves in glory so that experience suggests that this effort could follow a similar course.