Author Topic: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.  (Read 27679 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline G-Unit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8331
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #2385 on: March 20, 2017, 10:15:37 AM »
as above "Do you think the timing of the events are unimportant?"

They are now. They were used when the McCann side was trying to prove Amaral's breach of his 'duty of reserve'. That argument has now been dropped after the Appeal judges rejected it.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Online Robittybob1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5177
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #2386 on: March 20, 2017, 10:19:54 AM »
They are now. They were used when the McCann side was trying to prove Amaral's breach of his 'duty of reserve'. That argument has now been dropped after the Appeal judges rejected it.
Bloody strange.  I'm going to try and have a thread on the timing just so I have a reference point.
What are you doing to find Madeleine?

Offline misty

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4768
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #2387 on: March 20, 2017, 12:54:16 PM »
The link provided does not work.  Do you have one that does?

Try this one.
http://portugalresident.com/child-sex-trafficking-in-portugal-authorities-%E2%80%98lose%E2%80%99-almost-half-%E2%80%98rescued-children%E2%80%99

If not, the news page on today's Portugal Resident has the story as one of its lead headers.

Offline G-Unit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8331
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #2388 on: March 20, 2017, 02:33:14 PM »
Try this one.
http://portugalresident.com/child-sex-trafficking-in-portugal-authorities-%E2%80%98lose%E2%80%99-almost-half-%E2%80%98rescued-children%E2%80%99

If not, the news page on today's Portugal Resident has the story as one of its lead headers.

Do you expect this safe house to keep the children under lock and key then? It seems like the only way to keep these children there.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline misty

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4768
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #2389 on: March 20, 2017, 02:55:06 PM »
Do you expect this safe house to keep the children under lock and key then? It seems like the only way to keep these children there.

I'd expect the State Authorities to treat these extremely vulnerable children in a responsible fashion & to be concerned about those who went missing.


Offline ShiningInLuz

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2854
    • Shining In Luz
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #2390 on: March 20, 2017, 02:59:07 PM »
Do you expect this safe house to keep the children under lock and key then? It seems like the only way to keep these children there.
For me, the intriguing questions raised in the article are -

- How does one get 36 children into Portugal from non-EU countries?  This would give an idea of routes and how porous the borders are.
- How are the children picked up by the authorities?  Presumably in their conduct of illegal activities?
- How do the children move on?  Even if they can cross the Portuguese border (Schengen) surely they need valid documentation wherever they end up?


I'm moving to Portelas!

Offline Alice Purjorick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6232
  • One man's style must not be the rule of another's.
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #2391 on: March 20, 2017, 03:08:52 PM »
For me, the intriguing questions raised in the article are -

- How does one get 36 children into Portugal from non-EU countries?  This would give an idea of routes and how porous the borders are.
- How are the children picked up by the authorities?  Presumably in their conduct of illegal activities?
- How do the children move on?  Even if they can cross the Portuguese border (Schengen) surely they need valid documentation wherever they end up?


As it was done on the drip and not in one hit, quite easily I would imagine.
"Visiting Portugal last year, it heard that of the 226 people identified as victims of trafficking over the last four years, 36 of these were children - five of them less than 10 years old".
"How readily and inexpensively we support justice for those with whom we have never conversed"

Online Robittybob1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5177
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #2392 on: March 20, 2017, 04:06:56 PM »
Try this one.
http://portugalresident.com/child-sex-trafficking-in-portugal-authorities-%E2%80%98lose%E2%80%99-almost-half-%E2%80%98rescued-children%E2%80%99

If not, the news page on today's Portugal Resident has the story as one of its lead headers.
Thanks Misty for finding it.
What are you doing to find Madeleine?