McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Mr Gray]

The claim is simply that Portugal has disallowed their “right to honour”. What the court decides to look at in and round the case is up to them. They may just look at the judgement.

In my Opinion.

The McCann's have a right to a good name....in order to see if this has been affected they will have to look at what amaral said about them

Amaral his book and the documentary are discussed in the judgement

[Brietta]

So you agree they became public figures?

If you read my post previously citing the Oxford Dictionary you will see that is the definition.

If you read the post to which you have replied you will see exactly why the supreme court judges may have overstepped the mark by penalising Kate and Gerry McCann for becoming "public figures" as a result of becoming the parents of a missing child.

[slartibartfast]

If you read my post previously citing the Oxford Dictionary you will see that is the definition.

If you read the post to which you have replied you will see exactly why the supreme court judges may have overstepped the mark by penalising Kate and Gerry McCann for becoming "public figures" as a result of becoming the parents of a missing child.

If I remember correctly, it said they were public figures by courting the media not by being the parents of a missing child.

[Brietta]

If I remember correctly, it said they were public figures by courting the media not by being the parents of a missing child.

If they "courted the media" it was by dint of being the parents of a missing child whose human rights, interestingly, might well be considered to have been violated if there was police resistance to publicising her disappearance in the first instance.

[G-Unit]

The situation Kate and Gerry found themselves facing in Portugal to disseminate information and to issue public appeals was far different to what happens when a child goes missing in Britain. Here the police take charge of everything acting as a barrier between media and relatives, in effect being press officers on their behalf.

I don't think I have seen any appeal for information in this country and most others which did not feature the attendance of uniformed police either making the appeal or in the background, supporting those who were.

Right from the initial stages and throughout an investigation a police presence appears to be an essential ingredient and even many years ago official press conferences were given by police supported relatives against a background of official local police badges.

Patrick Warren and David Spencer

Kate and Gerry did not receive that official police backup to publicise Madeleine and ask for public help.  They had to do that for themselves.  They had to put out publicity for Madeleine not against a backdrop featuring a police logo but one of the claim that they had called SKY NEWS before reporting Madeleine missing; and so their traducing began.

It doesn't matter what the motive was, it's the result that counts.

[Robittybob1]

The situation Kate and Gerry found themselves facing in Portugal to disseminate information and to issue public appeals was far different to what happens when a child goes missing in Britain. Here the police take charge of everything acting as a barrier between media and relatives, in effect being press officers on their behalf.

I don't think I have seen any appeal for information in this country and most others which did not feature the attendance of uniformed police either making the appeal or in the background, supporting those who were.

Right from the initial stages and throughout an investigation a police presence appears to be an essential ingredient and even many years ago official press conferences were given by police supported relatives against a background of official local police badges.

Patrick Warren and David Spencer

Kate and Gerry did not receive that official police backup to publicise Madeleine and ask for public help.  They had to do that for themselves.  They had to put out publicity for Madeleine not against a backdrop featuring a police logo but one of the claim that they had called SKY NEWS before reporting Madeleine missing; and so their traducing began.

".... claim that they had called SKY NEWS before reporting Madeleine missing"

From what I can tell, was that Rachael called the media when she used the computer in the Moyes residence.
Part of the purpose of doing the re-enactment was to discover who of the Tapas 9 called the media, and it was Rachael who bluntly refused to attend.  Once I noticed this triangle of factoids I wondered if they were connected and Rachael feared being made arguido if she returned.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm

"2x Suxxxxxxxx Gaxxxxx
London
SW xx 8xx

Date 23rd May 2008

Maria Luisa Nascimento Duarte
Ministerio Publico de Portimao
Av. Miguel Bombarda
Palacio da Justica
no 2 Piso
8501-960 Portimao

Reference : 3951283

Dear Sir,

I write with reference to the Notification dated 9th May 2008, which I received on Saturday 17th May 2008.

I am hereby informing you that I will not be attending the proposed Reconstruction in Portugal on 29th and 30th May 2008. I have reached this decision after considering advice from our Lawyers.

Yours faithfully,

Rachael Marimma Jean Mampilly.

[Robittybob1]

I find the Supreme Court finding relating to the failed re-enactment unfairly blamed on the McCanns.  They were arguidos at the time and had never refused to attend.  It appears to be Jes Wilkins and Rachael  who don't agree to attend.  It was difficult to arrange a date that suited and the PJ seemed reluctant to issue summonses in order to force attendance. 
Rachael appears to have no active role in the disappearance of Madeleine so I don't understand how her non-participation should have stopped the re-enactment happening.
It certainly should not be blamed on the McCanns and no consequence of the failure to perform the re-enactment should reflect on the guilt of the McCanns.

[Robittybob1]

In one of Russell O'Brien's communication the issue of the News Media is raised.
"It is somewhat reassuring to see in writing from the PJ that there are "no suspicions over [us] regarding the commission of any criminal acts." However, we heard something similar in the weeks before Kate and Gerry were made arguidos! Additionally, the thrust of the PJ's closed questions during the re-interviews seemed only to focus on Kate and Gerry's culpability, suspicion about our written timeline or who involved the media."

Did they get the answer to that closed question "who involved the media"?

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm

[Alice Purjorick]

The claim imo is that amarals book has affected their honour and that the Portuguese courts have allowed this

What claim do you think they are making

That boat sailed in 2010 when it was ruled that the book did not infringe the McCanns rights.
None the less the McCanns elected to proceed with abortive litigation for damages.
 

[Mr Gray]

That boat sailed in 2010 when it was ruled that the book did not infringe the McCanns rights.
None the less the McCanns elected to proceed with abortive litigation for damages.

The echr could possibly call the boat back,,,imo

[Mr Gray]

That boat sailed in 2010 when it was ruled that the book did not infringe the McCanns rights.
None the less the McCanns elected to proceed with abortive litigation for damages.

If the ECHR eventually decide that the SC misintepreted european law in this case then it would be that the mccanns were right to bring the case and could not be expected to see that the portuguese courts would get things so wrong...al my opinion

[Alice Purjorick]

If you read my post previously citing the Oxford Dictionary you will see that is the definition.

If you read the post to which you have replied you will see exactly why the supreme court judges may have overstepped the mark by penalising Kate and Gerry McCann for becoming "public figures" as a result of becoming the parents of a missing child.

The problem being how the ECtHR define "public figure" not how The OED defines public figure.

[Alice Purjorick]

If the ECHR eventually decide that the SC misintepreted european law in this case then it would be that the mccanns were right to bring the case and could not be expected to see that the portuguese courts would get things so wrong...al my opinion

Would you like to explain what EU law has to do with the ECtHR?

"The European Union (EU) has decided not to be bound by the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights"

[Alice Purjorick]

The echr could possibly call the boat back,,,imo

The ECtHR might also ask why an application was not made in 2010.

[Mr Gray]

The ECtHR might also ask why an application was not made in 2010.

?   The McCanns have to exhaust all domestic remedies first
That's why they challenged the SC decision...a hopeless but necessary exercise