Former Portuguese detective Gonçalo Amaral wins appeal in damages trial.

[xtina]

It seems Xtina, the arrogance and self-pitying of the Mccanns knows no limits.

I thought searching for 'their beloved daughter' was their top priority.

Not in needless court cases.

exactly Stephen.


why don't they just cut there loses .....

and concentrate on the child they lost .maddie through there own actions.

fgs ....they would have been better leaving it from the off .....they are the ones giving it so much publicity...

surley they can see now .there is no money in it for them .....

only publicity for G A .....a good thing though really for the world to see what he has to say.....

[stephen25000]

The irony is that a court case against a book which was 'harming the search' for Madeleine has now become something completely different. They were unable to prove that assertion, so it can't be used as a justification any more.

What is the justification for continuing now? It seems to be because losing will 'wipe out the Fund', which will be needed when (not if, note) the SY investigation ends. So now it is about money pure and simple. The friend' isn't Clarence, imo, he would never make that statement of certainty about SY.

Does it all come down now to their intention of going to the ECHR.

If I am correct, they have to pursue all legal possibilities in their country before they do that.

[xtina]

doubt they would get anywhere with E C H R




The right to respect for a private life often needs to be balanced against the right to freedom of expression....

For example a public (high profile) figure does not necessarily enjoy the same respect for their private life as others,

 as matters of public concern might justify the publication of information about that person that might otherwise interfere with the right to privacy.......

Bearing in mind the Appeal Court's judgement that the McCanns voluntarily limit their own right to privacy by placing themselves in the national and intermediate media, so their right to privacy was self violated.

[stephen25000]

doubt they would get anywhere with E C H R




The right to respect for a private life often needs to be balanced against the right to freedom of expression....

For example a public (high profile) figure does not necessarily enjoy the same respect for their private life as others,

 as matters of public concern might justify the publication of information about that person that might otherwise interfere with the right to privacy.......

Bearing in mind the Appeal Court's judgement that the McCanns voluntarily limit their own right to privacy by placing themselves in the national and intermediate media, so their right to privacy was self violated.

I agree Xtina.

Your last sentence personifies why they would fail.

[Carana]

My opinion is that the Portuguese were a bit out of their depth and deferred to the British because they were perceived as the experts.

I agree that they were out of their depth, but I'm not sure how they "deferred" to the UK. The PJ may well have felt submerged by the extent of UK assistance and, of course, the ensuing media frenzy. On the other hand, the UK has established guidelines and a lot more experience in such cases (not that they always get everything right, either).

[Alice Purjorick]

Does it all come down now to their intention of going to the ECHR.

If I am correct, they have to pursue all legal possibilities in their country before they do that.

It would be an exceptional point on which the ECHR would overturn any judgement made by the courts of any state which is a member of The Council of Europe.
The best they are likely to get is few grand if the ECHR finds the State of Portugal party to unfair treatment of the McCanns in this specific instance.
IMO Steel & Morris v The UK is good case look at in terms of duration, grounds and sentence.

If the Supreme Court rule in favour of Amaral that's the end of the line; shell out and go home.

[Angelo222]

Does it all come down now to their intention of going to the ECHR.

If I am correct, they have to pursue all legal possibilities in their country before they do that.

That's correct, they have to pursue all domestic remedies prior to submitting any application to the ECHR.

[Angelo222]

It would be an exceptional point on which the ECHR would overturn any judgement made by the courts of any state which is a member of The Council of Europe.
The best they are likely to get is few grand if the ECHR finds the State of Portugal party to unfair treatment of the McCanns in this specific instance.
IMO Steel & Morris v The UK is good case look at in terms of duration, grounds and sentence.

If the Supreme Court rule in favour of Amaral that's the end of the line; shell out and go home.

I tend to agree, I also think Mrs Duarte will need some pretty strong arguments if she is ever to have any hope of overturning the Appeal Courts decision given its prominence.  I have a feeling the Portuguese have spoken and made their views known in the strongest of terms.

[stephen25000]

Now the Mail joins the throng.

The Mccanns are getting slated again in the comments and accompanying votes.

Rightly so.

Their act has worn very thin.



Another article in the Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3616604/Kate-Gerry-McCann-lodge-new-legal-bid-silence-former-detective.html

[ferryman]

I tend to agree, I also think Mrs Duarte will need some pretty strong arguments if she is ever to have any hope of overturning the Appeal Courts decision given its prominence.  I have a feeling the Portuguese have spoken and made their views known in the strongest of terms.

I imagine that if the McCanns took the case to the ECHR, it would be as an appeal against flagrant breach of human rights (that a book accusing them baselessly of dreadful crimes should, nevertheless, be allowed to sell) rather than as a direct appeal against a ruling of the Portuguese courts.

[stephen25000]

I imagine that if the McCanns took the case to the ECHR, it would be as an appeal against flagrant breach of human rights (that a book accusing them baselessly of dreadful crimes should, nevertheless, be allowed to sell) rather than as a direct appeal against a ruling of the Portuguese courts.

Total rubbish.

I would love to see them try.

They would get laughed out of court.

[G-Unit]

I imagine that if the McCanns took the case to the ECHR, it would be as an appeal against flagrant breach of human rights (that a book accusing them baselessly of dreadful crimes should, nevertheless, be allowed to sell) rather than as a direct appeal against a ruling of the Portuguese courts.

If the McCanns lose their Supreme Court Appeal and they go to the ECHR it will be them accusing Portugal of denying them their human rights.

If the ECHR finds in favour of the McCanns it will not stop the book being offered for sale.

[slartibartfast]

If the McCanns lose their Supreme Court Appeal and they go to the ECHR it will be them accusing Portugal of denying them their human rights.

If the ECHR finds in favour of the McCanns it will not stop the book being offered for sale.

That seems a fact too far for some to comprehend.

[Alfie]

That seems a fact too far for some to comprehend.

I'll say!

[Jean-Pierre]

If the McCanns lose their Supreme Court Appeal and they go to the ECHR it will be them accusing Portugal of denying them their human rights.

If the ECHR finds in favour of the McCanns it will not stop the book being offered for sale.

I am far from convinced that taking the case to the echr is the right way to go.  This is essentially a civil matter and it is difficult to see what a successful appeal to the echr could bring by way of remedies.  But I am a pragmatist.

If the appeal to the Supreme Court is unsuccessful then Maybe the matter should rest there, stump up the costs and move on。taking a case to court is always a risk, and sometimes shit happens. 

In the words of WC fields - 'if at first you don't succeed try and try again.  Then give up - no point being a damn fool about it'