ECHR urge McCanns to reach friendly settlement with Gonçalo Amaral.

[Carana]

Catching up.

Hey, relax Max (es)!

As a discussion forum, people obviously defend their views... Sometimes those discussions can get heated and some may find that they are being attacked personally, which is never a nice feeling.

It's not just about this case - I noticed it when I was trying to follow the facts about several others cases: hundreds of pages of irrelevant spats to wade through, which really don't help anyone to form a view of what may have actually happened.

[G-Unit]

Furthermore, if the McCanns had face trial in Portugal following the publication of Amaral’s book and media campaign do you think they would have received a fair trial?

I don't think the McCanns made much effort with the Portuguese media for some reason. All their efforts seemed to be focused on the UK media.

[Carana]

I don't think the McCanns made much effort with the Portuguese media for some reason. All their efforts seemed to be focused on the UK media.

I find that partly true, but a) they didn't speak the language; b) the pro-PJ media was hostile; c) any objective media rarely, erm, got translated (and Google translate was in its infancy back then), d) loads of objective articles from the PT press at the time are no longer available online.

[G-Unit]

Catching up.

Hey, relax Max (es)!

As a discussion forum, people obviously defend their views... Sometimes those discussions can get heated and some may find that they are being attacked personally, which is never a nice feeling.

It's not just about this case - I noticed it when I was trying to follow the facts about several others cases: hundreds of pages of irrelevant spats to wade through, which really don't help anyone to form a view of what may have actually happened.

A very sensible post. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

I don't think the McCanns made much effort with the Portuguese media for some reason. All their efforts seemed to be focused on the UK media.

I think you have totally evaded the question.  Do you really think it is up to the accused to try and win the foreign media over to their side?

How about you try again?

if the McCanns had face trial in Portugal following the publication of Amaral’s book and media campaign do you think they would have received a fair trial?

[G-Unit]

I find that partly true, but a) they didn't speak the language; b) the pro-PJ media was hostile; c) any objective media rarely, erm, got translated (and Google translate was in its infancy back then), d) loads of objective articles from the PT press at the time are no longer available online.

I really don't know where I saw it, but I seem to remember a Portuguese journalist saying the McCanns refused to speak to them. I know they didn't speak the language, but they managed to communicate with the media in other countries as I recall. What seemed to happen was that the Portuguese and UK media cherry-picked and repeated each other's stories. Perhaps the Portuguese media became pro-PJ due to the anti-PJ attitude of the McCanns and the UK media? 

I found this article from 2007 interesting;

https://pressgazette.co.uk/madeleine-mccann-coverage-did-we-get-it-right/

It certainly offers an understanding of why Amaral felt the need to defend his 'honour' and offer his opinions on the case.

Paul Johnson, deputy editor, The Guardian

"The British press as a body was sticking the boot into the Portuguese judicial system – that we probably don’t understand too well – and also sticking the boot in about the police methods of inquiry."

[Vertigo Swirl]

I really don't know where I saw it, but I seem to remember a Portuguese journalist saying the McCanns refused to speak to them. I know they didn't speak the language, but they managed to communicate with the media in other countries as I recall. What seemed to happen was that the Portuguese and UK media cherry-picked and repeated each other's stories. Perhaps the Portuguese media became pro-PJ due to the anti-PJ attitude of the McCanns and the UK media? 

I found this article from 2007 interesting;

https://pressgazette.co.uk/madeleine-mccann-coverage-did-we-get-it-right/

It certainly offers an understanding of why Amaral felt the need to defend his 'honour' and offer his opinions on the case.

Paul Johnson, deputy editor, The Guardian

"The British press as a body was sticking the boot into the Portuguese judicial system – that we probably don’t understand too well – and also sticking the boot in about the police methods of inquiry."

And how do you think the Anti-McCann coverage (espcially that led by Amaral publicising his bestselling book and theory) would have affected the McCanns' right to a fair trial had one eventuated in Portugal?

[G-Unit]

I think you have totally evaded the question.  Do you really think it is up to the accused to try and win the foreign media over to their side?

How about you try again?

if the McCanns had face trial in Portugal following the publication of Amaral’s book and media campaign do you think they would have received a fair trial?

Why court any press?

Yvonne Radley, news editor, Gcap’s Leicester Sound

When somebody courts the press like the McCanns did in the initial stages, you can’t expect that to stop if the situation changes like it did when they became arguidos.
https://pressgazette.co.uk/madeleine-mccann-coverage-did-we-get-it-right/

Jeremy Paxman;

you collaborated with them when it was convenient to you, didn't you? And you would announce photocalls and whether or not you'd be speaking that day - or maybe tomorrow or the day after. D'you .... d'you think to some degree you .... you reaped a whirlwind?
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/03/gerry-mccann-talks-to-jeremy-paxman.html

One of the things the Portuguese Supreme court judges commented on was how the McCanns voluntarily sacrificed their own privacy and thus reduced their entitlement to the protection of Article 8 of the ECHR.

Amaral's effect upon the possibility of a fair trial was dealt with by the Portuguese courts. It was established that he was not constrained by the rules of his former occupation, which is how the judge of the first instance found against him.

The McCanns haven't bothered applying to the ECHR about the role of the Portuguese media coverage in damaging their right to a fair trial. As I don't know much about that coverage, I can't comment on what effect it may have had.

[Mr Gray]

I really don't know where I saw it, but I seem to remember a Portuguese journalist saying the McCanns refused to speak to them. I know they didn't speak the language, but they managed to communicate with the media in other countries as I recall. What seemed to happen was that the Portuguese and UK media cherry-picked and repeated each other's stories. Perhaps the Portuguese media became pro-PJ due to the anti-PJ attitude of the McCanns and the UK media? 

I found this article from 2007 interesting;

https://pressgazette.co.uk/madeleine-mccann-coverage-did-we-get-it-right/

It certainly offers an understanding of why Amaral felt the need to defend his 'honour' and offer his opinions on the case.

Paul Johnson, deputy editor, The Guardian

"The British press as a body was sticking the boot into the Portuguese judicial system – that we probably don’t understand too well – and also sticking the boot in about the police methods of inquiry."

To anyone who understands Amaral's book does not fefend his honour but confirms the McCanns were right to criticise the PJ. The book and the documentary confirm amaral did not understand the evidence. How couldd he possibly solve the case if he cant understand the basics

[G-Unit]

To anyone who understands Amaral's book does not fefend his honour but confirms the McCanns were right to criticise the PJ. The book and the documentary confirm amaral did not understand the evidence. How couldd he possibly solve the case if he cant understand the basics

I don't know if your opinions are relevant to the ECHR deliberations or not. I do know that the SC judges reached a different conclusion;

Of all those circumstances does not result, in our view, that underlying the book, the documentary and the interview, exists an defamatory intention against the appellants, i.e an animus injuriandi, but rather an animus informandi and an animus defendendi.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.15 page 67

[Mr Gray]

I don't know if your opinions are relevant to the ECHR deliberations or not. I do know that the SC judges reached a different conclusion;

Of all those circumstances does not result, in our view, that underlying the book, the documentary and the interview, exists an defamatory intention against the appellants, i.e an animus injuriandi, but rather an animus informandi and an animus defendendi.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.15 page 67

I do know that the facts I have stated are relevant because the ECHR will be concerned with the veracity of the claims.. Something Ive provided cites for several times

As regards the SCs OPINION... in cases that result in a judgement they are wrong 95% of the time.. Again cite provided previously

[Vertigo Swirl]

Why court any press?

Yvonne Radley, news editor, Gcap’s Leicester Sound

When somebody courts the press like the McCanns did in the initial stages, you can’t expect that to stop if the situation changes like it did when they became arguidos.
https://pressgazette.co.uk/madeleine-mccann-coverage-did-we-get-it-right/

Jeremy Paxman;

you collaborated with them when it was convenient to you, didn't you? And you would announce photocalls and whether or not you'd be speaking that day - or maybe tomorrow or the day after. D'you .... d'you think to some degree you .... you reaped a whirlwind?
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/03/gerry-mccann-talks-to-jeremy-paxman.html

One of the things the Portuguese Supreme court judges commented on was how the McCanns voluntarily sacrificed their own privacy and thus reduced their entitlement to the protection of Article 8 of the ECHR.

Amaral's effect upon the possibility of a fair trial was dealt with by the Portuguese courts. It was established that he was not constrained by the rules of his former occupation, which is how the judge of the first instance found against him.

The McCanns haven't bothered applying to the ECHR about the role of the Portuguese media coverage in damaging their right to a fair trial. As I don't know much about that coverage, I can't comment on what effect it may have had.

lol, what a very disingenuous response, as expected.

[G-Unit]

I do know that the facts I have stated are relevant because the ECHR will be concerned with the veracity of the claims.. Something Ive provided cites for several times

As regards the SCs OPINION... in cases that result in a judgement they are wrong 95% of the time.. Again cite provided previously

I can't comment as I don't keep a list of cites you have provided. Even if I did, I have no way of knowing which ones relate to what.

[jassi]

I do know that the facts I have stated are relevant because the ECHR will be concerned with the veracity of the claims.. Something Ive provided cites for several times

As regards the SCs OPINION... in cases that result in a judgement they are wrong 95% of the time.. Again cite provided previously

Of course, if say, only 1 in 100 SC rulings  get as far as to a ECHR ruling , then the SC are correct most of the time

[Vertigo Swirl]

Of course, if say, only 1 in 100 SC rulings  go to the ECHR, then the SC are correct most of the time

Something would have to be very seriously wrong with a country's legal system if they were wrong most of the time.