Author Topic: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.  (Read 175169 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Davel

Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #375 on: October 27, 2013, 10:29:11 PM »
Actually, that would be for a court to decide. We can't become judge and just now can we  ?{)(**

not necessarily, it might not go to court..
It must upset posters that it now looks as though I was right all along

Offline Davel

Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #376 on: October 27, 2013, 10:34:24 PM »
Actually, that would be for a court to decide. We can't become judge and just now can we  ?{)(**

you should remember that in UK courts the times would have to prove that everything in their article was true...would you like to reconsider your post
It must upset posters that it now looks as though I was right all along

Offline Davel

Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #377 on: October 27, 2013, 10:37:44 PM »
In that case then it isn't libelous. Simple.

yes it is.. in the same way that the express didn't go to court,...they issued an apology
It must upset posters that it now looks as though I was right all along

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #378 on: October 27, 2013, 10:39:47 PM »
Anne I don't think you quite grasp the principle of intellectual property..it is a bit intellectual
When I freely publish a chronicle it remains my intellectual property. If somebody plagiarises it I can sue the cheater.
A person contracted to make an e-fit isn't free, the contract may or not specify how many copies will be made and the sketcher will be paid according to that.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2013, 10:42:56 PM by AnneGuedes »

Offline Davel

Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #379 on: October 27, 2013, 10:41:11 PM »
of course I wouldn't. I made a factual statement. It's for a court to decide if something is libelous.

so what you are saying is that libel cannot be admitted to avoid a court case..you need to think again
It must upset posters that it now looks as though I was right all along

Offline Davel

Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #380 on: October 27, 2013, 10:50:28 PM »
Its not for you to decide. Unless of course you are on the jury  8-)(--) or you are in a position to accept responsibility for the article and can apologise. Are you either?


like a lot of posters who debate with me you avoid the question when your argument falls apart...Libel can be admitted by a party to avoid going to court..its a fact

just to add..when you have completely lost the argument you post stupid smileys
« Last Edit: October 27, 2013, 10:52:09 PM by davel »
It must upset posters that it now looks as though I was right all along

icabodcrane

  • Guest
Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #381 on: October 27, 2013, 10:54:36 PM »
No  word of denial from the McCann camp yet then ?

Offline Davel

Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #382 on: October 27, 2013, 10:58:57 PM »
No  word of denial from the McCann camp yet then ?

not sure if you have noticed but its sunday afternoon
another little question for you
How long did it take to issue proceedings against amaral.... and against bennett
It must upset posters that it now looks as though I was right all along

Offline Davel

Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #383 on: October 27, 2013, 11:03:17 PM »
Its not for you to decide. Unless of course you are on the jury or you are in a position to accept responsibility for the article and can apologise. Are you either?

so you have given up on your previous argument...have the good nature to admit that you were totally wrong before we continue the conversation
It must upset posters that it now looks as though I was right all along

icabodcrane

  • Guest
Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #384 on: October 27, 2013, 11:11:39 PM »
not sure if you have noticed but its sunday afternoon
another little question for you
How long did it take to issue proceedings against amaral.... and against bennett

Nonsense

This is a very serious charge  ...   the man who's E fit the McCanns are accused of 'burying'   could be the man who took Madeleine afterall 

They have been accused in a broad sheet newspaper of  hiding information from the police   ...  information which was crucial to the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance

If an  immediate response and rebuttal was ever called for,  this is it

Offline Davel

Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #385 on: October 27, 2013, 11:15:52 PM »
Nonsense

This is a very serious charge  ...   the man who's E fit the McCanns are accused of 'burying'   could be the man who took Madeleine afterall 

They have been accused in a broad sheet newspaper of  hiding information from the police   ...  information which was crucial to the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance

If an  immediate response and rebuttal was ever called for,  this is it


well you can stamp your feet as much as you want but no one is going to take any notice of you
It must upset posters that it now looks as though I was right all along

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #386 on: October 27, 2013, 11:17:46 PM »
I've noticed the way you argue on here and it's not going to work with me.

The thread is here for all to see and you are arguing the toss because you refuse to accept that you do not have the authority to make the claims that it was libelous. It's also plain to see that I accept that out of court settlements are allowed. But you can not make that out of court settlement. Therefore the claim is not libelous.

Oh and by the way, you made a mistake. It's for the plaintiff to prove that the defendant made false statements, not the defendant proving they were true statements.

Here, we would be talking about English law, where the burden is on the defendant to prove that statements alleged to be libel are true.

In Portugal (and most of the rest of the world) the burden is the other way.


Offline Davel

Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #387 on: October 27, 2013, 11:21:08 PM »
I've noticed the way you argue on here and it's not going to work with me.

The thread is here for all to see and you are arguing the toss because you refuse to accept that you do not have the authority to make the claims that it was libelous. It's also plain to see that I accept that out of court settlements are allowed. But you can not make that out of court settlement. Therefore the claim is not libelous.

Oh and by the way, you made a mistake. It's for the plaintiff to prove that the defendant made false statements, not the defendant proving they were true statements.

I can see now why you don't have a clue..research uk libel law and you just might have a clue whats going on


It must upset posters that it now looks as though I was right all along

Offline VIXTE

Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #388 on: October 27, 2013, 11:21:30 PM »
Nonsense

This is a very serious charge  ...   the man who's E fit the McCanns are accused of 'burying'   could be the man who took Madeleine afterall 

They have been accused in a broad sheet newspaper of  hiding information from the police   ...  information which was crucial to the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance

If an  immediate response and rebuttal was ever called for,  this is it

I wonder which police that would be? Because at that time there was no active police investigation.

Offline xtina

Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
« Reply #389 on: October 27, 2013, 11:22:38 PM »
Nonsense

This is a very serious charge  ...   the man who's E fit the McCanns are accused of 'burying'   could be the man who took Madeleine afterall 

They have been accused in a broad sheet newspaper of  hiding information from the police   ...  information which was crucial to the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance

If an  immediate response and rebuttal was ever called for,  this is it

exactly..


Five years have been wasted in the hunt for Madeleine McCann while pictures of the prime suspect in her abduction were suppressed.

This has huge implications for the libel trial which is being heard  in Portugal the mccs have applied to give evidence .....

to say that G.A................harmed the search ....fgs
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.