Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.

[Mr Gray]

I read Levenson, and the comments made by Kate Mccann in reference to Michael Wright.


...and your opinion is irrelevant.

[stephen25000]

Meanwhile................

' The ECHR's annual statistics also show that nearly 99.9% of the 1,652 UK cases brought to the court in 2013 were declared inadmissible or struck out. '


https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jan/30/european-court-human-rights-case-backlog-falls


Mmm.

[carlymichelle]

Meanwhile................

' The ECHR's annual statistics also show that nearly 99.9% of the 1,652 UK cases brought to the court in 2013 were declared inadmissible or struck out. '


https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jan/30/european-court-human-rights-case-backlog-falls


Mmm.

so  not  worth bothering about basically

[stephen25000]

so  not  worth bothering about basically

Minimal compensation payments ,and a very low probability of either having the case accepted, let alone succeeding in winning a case.

[G-Unit]

There is no propaganda machine
It's in your imagination

The fact that you don't know about something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[Benice]

That is my opinion.

I'm not going to change it.

I suggest you refer back to the Leveson inquiry, which has been done on this forum, and the admittance of Kate Mccann.

You certainly will not silence my opinion, whether on here or elsewhere.

So are you saying Stephen  - that if the claim is made that people like yourself are obviously part of a propaganda machine organised by Amaral to go round forums specifically to attack the McCanns and anyone who supports them - that you would find that an acceptable description of your reason for posting?   Surely not?

AFAIAC it would be an abuse of your right to express your opinions without being libelled by people making claims that you are part of some organised conspiracy and are following a specific agenda.

I'm surprised that you are allowed to repeatedly make this uncorroberrated allegation about other posters- as IMO it clearly constitutes 'abuse' and is against the rules.   

[G-Unit]

So are you saying Stephen  - that if the claim is made that people like yourself are obviously part of a propaganda machine organised by Amaral to go round forums specifically to attack the McCanns and anyone who supports them - that you would find that an acceptable description of your reason for posting?   Surely not?

AFAIAC it would be an abuse of your right to express your opinions without being libelled by people making claims that you are part of some organised conspiracy and are following a specific agenda.

I'm surprised that you are allowed to repeatedly make this uncorroberrated allegation about other posters- as IMO it clearly constitutes 'abuse' and is against the rules.

I have seen the same (and worse) accusations made toward 'sceptics' and they have been allowed to stand.

[stephen25000]

So are you saying Stephen  - that if the claim is made that people like yourself are obviously part of a propaganda machine organised by Amaral to go round forums specifically to attack the McCanns and anyone who supports them - that you would find that an acceptable description of your reason for posting?   Surely not?

AFAIAC it would be an abuse of your right to express your opinions without being libelled by people making claims that you are part of some organised conspiracy and are following a specific agenda.

I'm surprised that you are allowed to repeatedly make this uncorroberrated allegation about other posters- as IMO it clearly constitutes 'abuse' and is against the rules.

Who said it was a conspiracy.

Meanwhile , what did Kate Mccann say at the Leveson Inquiry.

Any guests can read around the internet and judge as to whether there is an  active group online backing the Mccanns.

[Benice]

I have seen the same (and worse) accusations made toward 'sceptics' and they have been allowed to stand.

Hand on heart I have never seen a post on here accusing sceptic posters of being part of a conspiracy orchestrated by Amaral.

[faithlilly]

Hand on heart I have never seen a post on here accusing sceptic posters of being part of a conspiracy orchestrated by Amaral.

Then you having been looking hard enough Benice.

I think it's true that both sceptic and supporter comments ( not necessarily on this forum ) make each and every one of us cringe at some point.

[Alice Purjorick]

What has the failure of witnesses to attend a reconstruction got to do with the Supreme Court's assessment of the defendant's right to freedom of expression about the plaintiffs?

Dunno! did I say it had?
It forms part of the 76 page judgement. Take it up with the Supreme Court if you don't like it.

[Benice]

Who said it was a conspiracy.

Meanwhile , what did Kate Mccann say at the Leveson Inquiry.


Any guests can read around the internet and judge as to whether there is an  active group online backing the Mccanns.

P.S. Even if my opinion is removed here, it will still be posted elsewhere.

Considering the large number of misinformed idiots and 'nutters' attracted by this case, (but thankfully not allowed to post here)  -  then it would be unwise of the McCanns not to have someone keeping an eye out for anything that might constitute a danger to their family.

My objection is to your repeated allegations that posters on this forum are part of a McCann-led propaganda machine.    Unless you can prove that with evidence then you should stop doing it.   Peddling untruths about other posters is against the rules.
 

[Mr Gray]

Who said it was a conspiracy.

Meanwhile , what did Kate Mccann say at the Leveson Inquiry.


Any guests can read around the internet and judge as to whether there is an  active group online backing the Mccanns.

P.S. Even if my opinion is removed here, it will still be posted elsewhere.

Instead of asking the question tell us what Kate said at Levenson
You don't seem to understand

[stephen25000]

Considering the large number of misinformed idiots and 'nutters' attracted by this case, (but thankfully not allowed to post here)  -  then it would be unwise of the McCanns not to have someone keeping an eye out for anything that might constitute a danger to their family.

My objection is to your repeated allegations that posters on this forum are part of a McCann-led propaganda machine.    Unless you can prove that with evidence then you should stop doing it.   Peddling untruths about other posters is against the rules.
 

It is my opinion.

McCann supporters have made comments on this forum as to why I post.

[xtina]

Right.  So that's it then.  We might as well all go home.  But I can't see that happening  any time soon.

well that's what i am  doing ..........feel as if its as far as i can go ...

all i ever wanted was justice ...and some sort of equal playing field ...[were the mccs don't have it all there own way

i can't stand anymore of associating with the pro posters on here .who insult ridicule and make the most .........t posts ...with no proof of abduction ...all in the name of empathy ....for the mccs ....asif]

G A got his justice .....hopefully will carry on fighting for maddies....

instead of fighting G A ...they should have took a lie detector test...you would have thought first option ...

in my dreams ......i hope the Macs will be re interviewed........and then we will see

and have to answer all the unanswered questions and inconsistency's

the second book of G A to hopefully reveal more.

whatever would they have done without that fund ....in the name of maddie...

seems maddie........ helped protect them .....pity they didn't protect maddie ...

to all my c/o posters on here ...Adios