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

[Eleanor]

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.

Are you saying they were all thick?

[Vertigo Swirl]

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.

Yeah and if he’d written a book about the World Cup Final in 1966 but only covered the first half of the game, he would have concluded it was a one-all draw. 

[Mr Gray]

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.

you can point out disimilarities.......its article 8 vs 10...i could probably quote 20 more. amaral claimed he could prove maddie died in the apartment and the parents covered it up...thats "proved"...he didnt,...the evidence did not support it. The investigation didnt say there was proof maddie died in the apartment.

amaral stated a fact with no evidence to support his claim...thats why having looked at other echr cases  im confident teh mccans will be successful.

[G-Unit]

you can point out disimilarities.......its article 8 vs 10...i could probably quote 20 more. amaral claimed he could prove maddie died in the apartment and the parents covered it up...thats "proved"...he didnt,...the evidence did not support it. The investigation didnt say there was proof maddie died in the apartment.

amaral stated a fact with no evidence to support his claim...thats why having looked at other echr cases  im confident teh mccans will be successful.

I don't know which translation you are relying on, do you have a link please?

[jassi]

you can point out disimilarities.......its article 8 vs 10...i could probably quote 20 more. amaral claimed he could prove maddie died in the apartment and the parents covered it up...thats "proved"...he didnt,...the evidence did not support it. The investigation didnt say there was proof maddie died in the apartment.

amaral stated a fact with no evidence to support his claim...thats why having looked at other echr cases  im confident teh mccans will be successful.

Weren't you confident that the McCanns would win their appeals?

[Mr Gray]

Weren't you confident that the McCanns would win their appeals?

No

I was confident they would win the first case... At the appeal I said they may well lose

[Mr Gray]

I don't know which translation you are relying on, do you have a link please?

What do you mean... Which translation... The translation of the video... The truth of the lie... Have you not seen it

It's even mentioned in the SC rulings

[G-Unit]

What do you mean... Which translation... The translation of the video... The truth of the lie... Have you not seen it

It's even mentioned in the SC rulings

Is there only one? Who added the translation to it?

[G-Unit]

Is there only one? Who added the translation to it?

I researched this and discovered that the owner of a video can order and pay for it to be translared. Is that how the subtitles got there? Who did it? What guatantee is there that it's correct?

[Mr Gray]

I researched this and discovered that the owner of a video can order and pay for it to be translared. Is that how the subtitles got there? Who did it? What guatantee is there that it's correct?

far more than the translated statements of the tapas...at least here we have the original to compare

[Holly Goodhead]

Weren't you confident that the McCanns would win their appeals?

Do any break down figs exist of % of time ECHR rule against lower courts? 

[Mr Gray]

Do any break down figs exist of % of time ECHR rule against lower courts?

staistics arent particulary important...its like sying bambers probably guilty based on statistics. I vaguely remember a recent case where the portuguese  SC were overuled by the ECHR...it all depends on the strength of the case

[G-Unit]

far more than the translated statements of the tapas...at least here we have the original to compare

Please provide a link, as requested. 

[Mr Gray]

I researched this and discovered that the owner of a video can order and pay for it to be translared. Is that how the subtitles got there? Who did it? What guatantee is there that it's correct?

the transcript is on the Morais site....shes a portuguese speaker and this come sfrom page 14 of the SC judgement..

In this documentary, the defendant is explicit right in the opening :

"My name is Gonçalo Amaral and I was investigator of the Judicial Police for 27 years. I coordinated the investigation of Madeleine McCann's disappearance on May 3 2007. In the next 50 minutes I will prove that the child was not kidnapped" (n° 41).

[Mr Gray]

Please provide a link, as requested.

joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/04/maddie-truth-of-lie-documentary.html