Can we judge a person's character by their stance on the case?

[Mr Gray]

I see this as a pointless exercise, as no one knows what the decision of the ECHR will be.

I agree its pointless... There will be no agreement on the possible outcome... Pointless like a lot of debate here

[jassi]

At last, something we can agree on

[G-Unit]

I think you miss the point... From what I've read the SC erred in their application of the law. For one the McCanns were entitled to the presumption of innocence... The SC as you are aware said no

I've missed nothing. The McCanns persuaded the first judge that;
 
Page 68
But is, in this case, the protection of the appellants' rights to their good name and reputation closely related to the presumption of innocence, as said in the first instance's sentence?

 
The SC judges answered that point. They never said the McCanns weren't entitled to the presumption of innocence, they said it was not closely related to the protection of their rights to their good name.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.15

[Mr Gray]

I've missed nothing. The McCanns persuaded the first judge that;
 
Page 68
But is, in this case, the protection of the appellants' rights to their good name and reputation closely related to the presumption of innocence, as said in the first instance's sentence?

 
The SC judges answered that point. They never said the McCanns weren't entitled to the presumption of innocence, they said it was not closely related to the protection of their rights to their good name.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.15

I remember seeing a statement in the judgement saying the presumption of innocence did not apply in a civil case whereas the ECHR have said it does

[G-Unit]

I remember seeing a statement in the judgement saying the presumption of innocence did not apply in a civil case whereas the ECHR have said it dies

Only in cases where a crminal court has previously delivered a ruling imo. Hence Duarte's attempt to argue that the archiving diispatch was equal to a crminal judgement.

[Mr Gray]

Only in cases where a crminal court has previously delivered a ruling imo. Hence Duarte's attempt to argue that the archiving diispatch was equal to a crminal judgement.

No you are wrong if you remember the case I quoted from Finland vs ECHR

[jassi]

Technically its not ECHR v anybody. They are the adjudicators

[Vertigo Swirl]

Nothing to do with Bamber per se. 

In a nutshell the person responsible for the murders can only have been either Bamber or his adopted sister Sheila Caffell, nee Bamber.  The fact myself and others who 'support' Bamber have expressed such views on forums etc means by default we are claiming the courts are wrong and that Bamber is the victim of a moj and the perp is Sheila Cafell but no one has mentioned the words libel or sue.

Some at the extreme end have posted ghastly and often totally unfounded comments about Sheila Caffell, her former husband, the adoptive parents, the extended family, the chief prosecution witness and many others but afaik no one has attempted to sue anyone.  And the extended family are not without financial means.

You support Bamber?  Now I really have to question your judgement. 

[Eleanor]

You support Bamber?  Now I really have to question your judgement.

Hang on a minute.  I think he could be innocent.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Hang on a minute.  I think he could be innocent.

Whaaaaat?  No way Jose.

[Holly Goodhead]

You support Bamber?  Now I really have to question your judgement.

Like many question your judgement about the McCanns. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

Like many question your judgement about the McCanns.

Not many.  My view that the McCanns are innocent of their child’s death and or disappearance is the mainstream accepted view, most people I talk to about the case in rl don’t much like the McCanns but do believe their child was abducted.  It’s only on the Lala internet that the conspiracy theories are accepted as true and the MSM version considered fake news.

[Holly Goodhead]

Not many.  My view that the McCanns are innocent of their child’s death and or disappearance is the mainstream accepted view, most people I talk to about the case in rl don’t much like the McCanns but do believe their child was abducted.  It’s only on the Lala internet that the conspiracy theories are accepted as true and the MSM version considered fake news.

But there's a mountain of anti McCann material everywhere and not just from cranks either.   

Here's not the place to discuss JB and I don't particularly want to go back on that board only to go round in circles with others but I would be interested in understanding your reasons why you believe Bamber is guilty and would be grateful if you could pm me when you have time.  Thanks.

[G-Unit]

No you are wrong if you remember the case I quoted from Finland vs ECHR

The case where an editor and a jounalist of a magazine were charged with and convicted of aggravated defamation?
In other words they were convicted of a criminal not a civil offense.

The ECHR upheld the findings of the Finnish courts because the magazine story, printed as fact, lacked supporting evidence.

The ECHR mentioned the presumption of innocence because the article says the baseball players did the crime, which would harm a trial if ever one took place .They didn't act on that because it wasn't part of the application, they just pointed it out.
https://lovdata.no/static/EMDN/emd-2006-045130.pdf

The case was very different to the McCann case. It hadn't been widely reported, no investigation had taken place and so no files had been released. Amaral used the evidence gathered by an official investigation and his
conclusion matched that of the investigation as at 10th Deptember 2007.

[Vertigo Swirl]

But there's a mountain of anti McCann material everywhere and not just from cranks either.   

Here's not the place to discuss JB and I don't particularly want to go back on that board only to go round in circles with others but I would be interested in understanding your reasons why you believe Bamber is guilty and would be grateful if you could pm me when you have time.  Thanks.

Most of the anti McCann material on the net  IS from cranks IMO. And as for Bamber, it was the forensics that proved Cavell could not have pulled the trigger on herself iirc.