What is the lie in Amarals book. The truth of the lie.

[Mr Gray]

Isabel Duarte is far from an idiot.

Only an idiot would claim a not guilty verdict is proof of innocence

[Venturi Swirl]

If you are not charged then it is not relevant.

So is it your contention that only those charged should be presumed innocent, and everyone who has not been charged would need to prove their innocence before being considered innocent?

[Robittybob1]

If you are not charged then it is not relevant.

But surely it applies to suspects or arguidos as well.

[Mr Gray]

But surely it applies to suspects or arguidos as well.

It does..... The definition of.. Charged... Is quite broad and includes suspects

[jassi]

So is it your contention that only those charged should be presumed innocent, and everyone who has not been charged would need to prove their innocence before being considered innocent?

Prove to whom ?
If someone has not been charged then the courts will have no interest in that person

[Robittybob1]

So is it your contention that only those charged should be presumed innocent, and everyone who has not been charged would need to prove their innocence before being considered innocent?

Doesn't sound right does it?

Prove to whom ?
If someone has not been charged then the courts will have no interest in that person

It is the public perception I'm concerned with. If I'm presumed innocent I want everyone to presume the same.

[Mr Gray]

Even those who are acquitted are not judged 'innocent', they are judged 'not guilty'. An archiving dispatch can't declare someone is innocent either, although Duarte said it could and did. That was her mistake.

I think you are under a gross misconception which is tainting your conclusions if you think duarte claimed that the archiving despatch was proof or a declaration of iinnocence... A cite is required

[G-Unit]

It is not the crux of the matter... It's irrelevant

An archiving under 277/1;

The Public Ministry shall, by dispatch, close the investigation, as soon as it has gathered sufficient evidence that the crime was not confirmed, that the arguido did not practice it in any way or that the procedure is legally inadmissible or that the procedure is legally inadmissible

The Prosecutor said when lifting the arguido statuses that it was because "there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code"

He didn't say the investigation had "gathered sufficient evidence" to show that "the arguido did not practice it in any way"

In my opinion the SC judges were correct to say the process was archived under 277/2

The investigation shall also be closed if it had not been possible for the Public Ministry to obtain sufficient evidence confirming the crime or who were the authors.

[Lace]

Even those who are acquitted are not judged 'innocent', they are judged 'not guilty'. An archiving dispatch can't declare someone is innocent either, although Duarte said it could and did. That was her mistake.

Not guilty means innocent though doesn't it?    Innocent until proven guilty.

[Mr Gray]

An archiving under 277/1;

The Public Ministry shall, by dispatch, close the investigation, as soon as it has gathered sufficient evidence that the crime was not confirmed, that the arguido did not practice it in any way or that the procedure is legally inadmissible or that the procedure is legally inadmissible

The Prosecutor said when lifting the arguido statuses that it was because "there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code"

He didn't say the investigation had "gathered sufficient evidence" to show that "the arguido did not practice it in any way"

In my opinion the SC judges were correct to say the process was archived under 277/2

The investigation shall also be closed if it had not been possible for the Public Ministry to obtain sufficient evidence confirming the crime or who were the authors.

It's irrelevant... Neither would be proof of innocence..... Now.. Cite for duarte as requested

[jassi]

Not guilty means innocent though doesn't it?    Innocent until proven guilty.

Not necessarily.
People have avoided being found not guilty, or had the case dismissed on a legal technicality, even though they may or may not be guilty.

[Mr Gray]

Not necessarily.
People have avoided being found not guilty, or had the case dismissed on a legal technicality, even though they may or may not be guilty.

Not guity doesn't mean that innocent... This is why the claims that the mccanns havn't proved their innocence are stupid... Even being tried and found not guiltty dies not prove innocence... Barry George being an example

[G-Unit]

Not guilty means innocent though doesn't it?    Innocent until proven guilty.

Not in the acquittal of Barry George it didn't.

[G-Unit]

I think you are under a gross misconception which is tainting your conclusions if you think duarte claimed that the archiving despatch was proof or a declaration of iinnocence... A cite is required

Here she's complaining about the SC ruling because it said the filing order wasn't proof of innocence as she claimed;

Just as (this STJ's Section) could not assert that it is not acceptable to assimilate the aforementioned filing order to a verified proof of innocence.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Annulment_request.htm

She seems to then resort to repeating what her clients believed;

"As far as the appellants are aware of, the archiving at stake was carried out, in the course of the investigation, because sufficient proof had been gathered that the then arguidos did not commit any facts of a criminal relevance and in any way whatsoever"

If that's what the McCanns told her and she believed them and built her arguments on the information they gave her..............Whoops! The prosecutor said no such thing in the archiving dispatch.

[Robittybob1]

An archiving under 277/1;

The Public Ministry shall, by dispatch, close the investigation, as soon as it has gathered sufficient evidence that the crime was not confirmed, that the arguido did not practice it in any way or that the procedure is legally inadmissible or that the procedure is legally inadmissible

The Prosecutor said when lifting the arguido statuses that it was because "there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code"

He didn't say the investigation had "gathered sufficient evidence" to show that "the arguido did not practice it in any way"

In my opinion the SC judges were correct to say the process was archived under 277/2

The investigation shall also be closed if it had not been possible for the Public Ministry to obtain sufficient evidence confirming the crime or who were the authors.

But that is not what the archiving report actually says.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
"Therefore, after all seen, analysed and duly pondered, with all that is left exposed, it is determined:

a) The archiving of the Process concerning arguido Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code;

b) The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.

Article 277 number 3 of the Penal Process Code is to be fulfilled.

Under article 214 number 1 item a) of the Penal Process Code, the coercion measures that have been imposed on the arguidos are declared extinct.

Portimão, 21.07.08

The Republic's Prosecutor

(José de Magalhaes e Menezes)"