McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Alice Purjorick]

im giving my opinion ..and you yours...lets see who is right... the case wiil be accepted   100% imo

OK.
On what is your opinion based ?

[Mr Gray]

Remind us what happened when the case went to court in Portugal.

Its nothing to do with portugal now

[Mr Gray]

OK.
On what is your opinion based ?

On reading the acceptance criteria

[Alice Purjorick]

Its nothing to do with portugal now

It's McCann v The State of Portugal now.
I would say that is alot to do with Portugal.

[Alice Purjorick]

On reading the acceptance criteria

Unless you have read the application knowing what the acceptance criteria are will not allow you to form a well judged opinion.

What you are saying effectively is:
"In my opinion "it" will be accepted but I don't know what the "it" is"

[slartibartfast]

its not...amaral accuses criminal action and libel per se ...as with alice im happy to accept the challenge ...you say it wont be accepted and I say it will...lets see who is the fool and who is the wise man

I don’t really care if it’s accepted or not, IMO The PT Justice System was very careful to tie up all the lose ends and refer back to the Convention on Human Rights. The judgement was a balancing of rights, a judgement not a case of right or wrong. Not something the ECHR will be able to add to.

[Mr Gray]

I don’t really care if it’s accepted or not, IMO The PT Justice System was very careful to tie up all the lose ends and refer back to the Convention on Human Rights. The judgement was a balancing of rights, a judgement not a case of right or wrong. Not something the ECHR will be able to add to.

The SC judgement was indeed a balancing act..we await to see if their judgement complied with European law..imo it didn't

[Alice Purjorick]

im giving my opinion ..and you yours...lets see who is right... the case wiil be accepted   100% imo

I wasn't giving an opinion.
You on the other hand appear to be mixing up two entirely different concepts.
You decide which one of the two you wish debate then I will join in 

[Brietta]

The OP carries a cite which states that Portuguese lawyers acting for the McCanns lodged an appeal with the ECHR in July 2017.

Let's argue about it on this thread and not all over the ship as at present.  I think it is called discipline and ...  running a tight ship.

[stephen25000]

The OP carries a cite which states that Portuguese lawyers acting for the McCanns lodged an appeal with the ECHR in July 2017.

Let's argue about it on this thread and not all over the ship as at present.  I think it is called discipline and ...  running a tight ship.

Which occurred after , the newspapers stated, ACCORDING TO A SOURCE, they wouldn't be appealing to the E.C.H.R.

So which one is true.

...and before anyone says it  was Clarence Mitchell, I take anything from him with the proverbial pinch of salt.

Remembering now, it is nothing to do with Amaral and the other parties involved in the court case, that is done and dusted.

Yup.

[Mr Gray]

Which occurred after , the newspapers stated, ACCORDING TO A SOURCE, they wouldn't be appealing to the E.C.H.R.

So which one is true.

...and before anyone says it  was Clarence Mitchell, I take anything from him with the proverbial pinch of salt.

Remembering now, it is nothing to do with Amaral and the other parties involved in the court case, that is done and dusted.

Yup.

as I have already said I believe it is true due to the detail given and a direct quote from clarence...its pointless arguing,,,...again we will just have to wait and see who is right

[Mr Gray]

Which occurred after , the newspapers stated, ACCORDING TO A SOURCE, they wouldn't be appealing to the E.C.H.R.

So which one is true.

...and before anyone says it  was Clarence Mitchell, I take anything from him with the proverbial pinch of salt.

Remembering now, it is nothing to do with Amaral and the other parties involved in the court case, that is done and dusted.

Yup.

if it goes ahead it will rule whether the SC judgemnet was correct to rule in amarals favour or not correct...I agree compensation would be small and portugal does not have to enforce the judgement...it would look bad for portugals courts if the ECHR found in the mccanns favour ...imo

[barrier]

if it goes ahead it will rule whether the SC judgemnet was correct to rule in amarals favour or not correct...I agree compensation would be small and portugal does not have to enforce the judgement...it would look bad for portugals courts if the ECHR found in the mccanns favour ...imo

In whose eye's.You supposedly quoted a case where the uk lost in the off topic thread,I see no embarrassment in any ones eye.

[barrier]

as I have already said I believe it is true due to the detail given and a direct quote from clarence...its pointless arguing,,,...again we will just have to wait and see who is right

The head of the Portuguese police federation didn't share the same sentiments about Mitchell back in 2008.

[stephen25000]

The head of the Portuguese police federation didn't share the same sentiments about Mitchell back in 2008.

I can't say I'm surprised by that.