The Supreme Court in Portugal will shortly decide the McCann v Amaral damages case.

[misty]

Are you accusing someone of something? Unless you can back it up I think you should stop now.

All I have seen is a report that the McCann's lawyer objected to one of the judges [unsuccessfully].
http://portugalresident.com/appeal-court-judges-reject-mccanns-%E2%80%98libel-win%E2%80%99

Did you not notice the word "hypothetically" (a word much used by those who doubt the legitimacy of the McCann Fund but have no problems with the other one) used in an example of how the media may influence the Supreme Court ruling?

[mercury]

There was a pr company that got an award for turning around the negative uk media stories on the mccanns in sept 07

Proof that the uk had negative media stories a year before the book tht required the services and payment of this co
Cant find the link now but its around

Ah found it

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id275.html

[Robittybob1]

Ah found it

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id275.html

Would the McCannfiles.com be biased against the McCanns?
I don't know exactly but reading their homepage I tend to think so.

Through their carefully orchestrated use of the media, the McCanns' campaign to 'find Madeleine' has drawn in the Pope, Oprah Winfrey, politicians in the UK and Europe, and a host of TV and sporting celebrities.

It seems to have slight negative view of the McCanns. 

[faithlilly]

As far as Portuguese law is concerned, it doesn't seem to know which side of the fence is the correct side to be. There are, however, a few ways in which British tabloid reports could hypothetically influence the appeal.

The only appeal allowed is on a point of law. How can a UK tabloid possible influence that ?

[Robittybob1]

The only appeal allowed is on a point of law. How can a UK tabloid possible influence that ?

They could write about the points of law that weren't followed in this case.
Missing statements, Missing data, insufficient statements from the staff looking after Madeleine, lack of sufficient statements from Kate, incorrect interpretation of the scientific results, setting up ruses to trap witnesses into making false confessions.  Writing books in Police time and calling it his own.  Allowing those with a vested interest to become translators.

[mercury]

Would the McCannfiles.com be biased against the McCanns?
I don't know exactly but reading their homepage I tend to think so.
It seems to have slight negative view of the McCanns.

Utterly irrelevant

The link to Hanover PR was the point in the discussion not the source of the link

[mercury]

They could write about the points of law that weren't followed in this case.
Missing statements, Missing data, insufficient statements from the staff looking after Madeleine, lack of sufficient statements from Kate, incorrect interpretation of the scientific results, setting up ruses to trap witnesses into making false confessions.  Writing books in Police time and calling it his own.  Allowing those with a vested interest to become translators.

All utterly irrelevant

[G-Unit]

Did you not notice the word "hypothetically" (a word much used by those who doubt the legitimacy of the McCann Fund but have no problems with the other one) used in an example of how the media may influence the Supreme Court ruling?

Your post;

post #316

hypothetically, I do think they'd be influenced if stories were published saying judges in the lower/appeal court had been leaned on.

So you just invented that idea? How strange. Well, as there's nothing to suggest that they were there's unlikely to be any such story published.

Even if there was, the Supreme Court is examining the legal arguments of the two previous hearings. Whichever legal arguments are, in their opinion, correct, will be upheld. So 'leaned on' or not, convincing legal arguments were still required.

[misty]

Your post;

post #316

hypothetically, I do think they'd be influenced if stories were published saying judges in the lower/appeal court had been leaned on.

So you just invented that idea? How strange. Well, as there's nothing to suggest that they were there's unlikely to be any such story published.

Even if there was, the Supreme Court is examining the legal arguments of the two previous hearings. Whichever legal arguments are, in their opinion, correct, will be upheld. So 'leaned on' or not, convincing legal arguments were still required.

I gave a hypothetical example of how the Supreme Court may be influenced by stories about judges in cases they are asked to examine. Of course, that's assuming a case makes court in the first place.......
http://portugalresident.com/former-judge-who-falsified-59-trial-results-walks-free

In the Ana Saltao (criminal) trial, she was cleared by the lower court of murder. The Appeal Court overturned that decision & sentenced her to 17 years without fresh evidence or re-trial. The Supreme Court recently overturned the Appeal Court's decision & ordered a complete retrial in a lower court.
http://www.tvi24.iol.pt/sociedade/tribunal-de-coimbra/julgamento-da-inspetora-da-pj-ana-saltao-vai-ser-repetido
 So, back to my original statement that even Portuguese law cannot decide which side of the fence is the correct one - also previously reflected in the book-banning saga.

[Alice Purjorick]

I gave a hypothetical example of how the Supreme Court may be influenced by stories about judges in cases they are asked to examine. Of course, that's assuming a case makes court in the first place.......
http://portugalresident.com/former-judge-who-falsified-59-trial-results-walks-free

In the Ana Saltao (criminal) trial, she was cleared by the lower court of murder. The Appeal Court overturned that decision & sentenced her to 17 years without fresh evidence or re-trial. The Supreme Court recently overturned the Appeal Court's decision & ordered a complete retrial in a lower court.
http://www.tvi24.iol.pt/sociedade/tribunal-de-coimbra/julgamento-da-inspetora-da-pj-ana-saltao-vai-ser-repetido
 So, back to my original statement that even Portuguese law cannot decide which side of the fence is the correct one - also previously reflected in the book-banning saga.

There are procedures in English law to do similar, so what is the problem ?

[misty]

There are procedures in English law to do similar, so what is the problem ?

Portuguese law is not the same as English law, that's the problem. If it was, then the McCanns would have been successful in their claim a long time ago, irrespective of any Appeal Court.

[ShiningInLuz]

Portuguese law is not the same as English law, that's the problem. If it was, then the McCanns would have been successful in their claim a long time ago, irrespective of any Appeal Court.

It's not the problem.  It's reality.  The book was published in Portugal, and the case was brought before a Portuguese court.

So Portuguese law applies.

If the McCanns wanted English law to apply, they should have raised the action in an English court.  As to whether an English court would have heard it and, if so, where that would have got them ...... sheer speculation.

Does an English court have the right to freeze the assets of a Portuguese citizen residing in Portugal re an incident occurring in Portugal?

[misty]

It's not the problem.  It's reality.  The book was published in Portugal, and the case was brought before a Portuguese court.

So Portuguese law applies.

If the McCanns wanted English law to apply, they should have raised the action in an English court.  As to whether an English court would have heard it and, if so, where that would have got them ...... sheer speculation.

Does an English court have the right to freeze the assets of a Portuguese citizen residing in Portugal re an incident occurring in Portugal?

The reality is that no two Portuguese judges interpret Portuguese Law in the same way and are at opposite ends of the spectrum where the McCann case is concerned.
I believe that there are European procedures  to freeze assets in the manner you describe so I will check it out.

[G-Unit]

I gave a hypothetical example of how the Supreme Court may be influenced by stories about judges in cases they are asked to examine. Of course, that's assuming a case makes court in the first place.......
http://portugalresident.com/former-judge-who-falsified-59-trial-results-walks-free

In the Ana Saltao (criminal) trial, she was cleared by the lower court of murder. The Appeal Court overturned that decision & sentenced her to 17 years without fresh evidence or re-trial. The Supreme Court recently overturned the Appeal Court's decision & ordered a complete retrial in a lower court.
http://www.tvi24.iol.pt/sociedade/tribunal-de-coimbra/julgamento-da-inspetora-da-pj-ana-saltao-vai-ser-repetido
 So, back to my original statement that even Portuguese law cannot decide which side of the fence is the correct one - also previously reflected in the book-banning saga.

A hypothetical example which I refuted, pointing out exactly what the Supreme Court is considering. Those cases are examples of how the Portuguese Judicial system operates. So?

Amaral's book was banned by the lower court, and the ban was overturned by the Appeal Court. I don't think the Supreme Court accepted the McCann's appeal on that one, didn't they reject it? It was filed on 5th November 2011 and on 18th;

The Supreme Court judges refused the request for an "exceptional review" of the Appeals Court's decision, which overturned the injunction that had been filed by Kate and Gerry McCann.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id347.html

[ferryman]

Portuguese law is not the same as English law, that's the problem. If it was, then the McCanns would have been successful in their claim a long time ago, irrespective of any Appeal Court.

Is right, the (recent) innovation of the defence of 'honest comment' (to respondents in a libel suit) notwithstanding.