Sceptics beliefs ?

[Mr Gray]

Perhaps if you ceased tarring sceptics with the brush of dishonesty, the forum might run a bit smoother.  Think it through.

And perhaps if gunit ceased claiming supporters, are basically blind believers the forum might run a little smoother

[G-Unit]

You have incorrectly claimed several times that the presumption of innocence does not apply to a civil trial...read below which is an ECHR ruling and you will see you are wrong..


Ruokanen and Others v. Finland
6 April 2010
The applicants were an editor-in-chief and a journalist and a publishing company. They
complained about their conviction of defamation following publication of an article stating
that a student had been raped in September 2000 by members of a baseball team at a
party to celebrate their victory in the Finnish championship. The applicants had been
ordered to pay over 80,000 euros in damages to compensate each member of the
baseball team.
The Court held that there had been no violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression)
of the Convention, finding that the domestic courts had struck a fair balance between the
competing interests involved, i.e. the applicants’ right to freedom of expression and the
10
Factsheet – Protection of reputation
right to reputation of the alleged perpetrators of a crime. It observed in particular that
imperatives other than matters of public concern had to be weighed up before an
incident was reported by the media to the public as fact. The right to presumption of
innocence and reputation of third parties was of equal importance especially where
serious accusations of sexual misconduct were concerned

if teh SC have denied the mccanns the presumption of innnocence tehn clearly they are in error...so we have absolute confirmation taht the presumption off innocence should be taken into account in a civil defamation case




www.echr.coe.int/Documents/FS_Reputation_ENG.pdf.   page 11

Was the presumption of innocence discussed in the original trial or was it mentioned only by the ECHR judges?

[Mr Gray]

.....and those poor McCanns will be the subject of online hate for the rest of time, how my heart bleeds for them.

I doubt in reality your comments on the Rs end of the internet read by 12 people bothers them

[Mr Gray]

Was the presumption of innocence discussed in the original trial or was it mentioned only by the ECHR judges?

Which original trial... The mccanns certainly raised it with the, SC... And my cite shows that according to the ECHR the SC should have respected the mccanns rights

[Wonderfulspam]

I doubt in reality your comments on the Rs end of the internet read by 12 people bother them

Me either. I said only yesterday that nothing we say here is of any consequence.
There are much worse wums & trolls than me on the #mccann.

[Mr Gray]

Me either. I said only yesterday that nothing we say here is of any consequence.
There are much worse wums & trolls than me on the #mccann.

Of course there are I've been the butt of some nastiness by some low life idiots... Not here... On the net... But I'm not bothered

[Venturi Swirl]

.....and those poor McCanns will be the subject of online hate for the rest of time, how my heart bleeds for them.

Revelling in others’ misery and suffering is such an unattractive trait IMO.

[Wonderfulspam]

Revelling in others’ misery and suffering is such an unattractive trait IMO.

I wasn't trying to turn you on.

[G-Unit]

Which original trial... The mccanns certainly raised it with the, SC... And my cite shows that according to the ECHR the SC should have respected the mccanns rights

The Finnish defamation case you quoted.

[Brietta]

.....and those poor McCanns will be the subject of online hate for the rest of time, how my heart bleeds for them.

                          It won't.  But it should.

[Venturi Swirl]

I wasn't trying to turn you on.

What ARE you trying to do?

[pathfinder73]

And the McCanns were listening to this stuff so I thought I'd share one. 3 being involved was of interest being my theory.

[Mr Gray]

The Finnish defamation case you quoted.

I quoted the ECHR ruling... We already know the mccanns raised the presumption of innocence with the SC.. Contrary to what yoy have claimed the ECHR have made it clear the POI applies to civil cases

[faithlilly]

Of course there are I've been the butt of some nastiness by some low life idiots... Not here... On the net... But I'm not bothered

Of course you’re not...that’s why you keep mentioning it.

[Mr Gray]

Of course you’re not...that’s why you keep mentioning it.

You can say whatever you like.  I'm not bothered... I value my dogs opinion far greater than I do yours.