Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.

[Alfie]

I can understand their disappointment, but graceful acceptance of anything is not their style. I found the first judgement strange because it never seemed to say that Amaral defamed the McCanns. Instead it concentrated on the supposed restrictions on his freedom of speech imposed by his former occupation; highlighted by the McCann's lawyer. I didn't, however, lambaste the judge, the Portuguese judiciary, Portuguese law or the country when the judge ruled in the McCann's favour.

The Appeal Court looked at the first judge's arguments concerning the restrictions on Amaral's freedom of speech and rejected them. The Supreme Court agreed.

"Accept Nothing".  First line of your signature...

[stephen25000]

graceful acceptance doesn't seem to be your style
mccanns no longer arguidos
SY say they are not suspects
SY explain they accept the abduction scenario


perhaps you should follow your own advice and  accept they are innocent

but of course greatful acceptance is not your style

Innocent of what dave ?

[carlymichelle]

Innocent of what dave ?

they kinda live in the past stephen     court  stuff  from 8 years ago is meanless the mcanns lost the whole case against amaral   its what the  portugese  courts say  that matter not the  uks

[stephen25000]

they kinda live in the past stephen     court  stuff  from 8 years ago is meanless the mcanns lost the whole case against amaral   its what the  portugese  courts say  that matter not the  uks

Indeed they seem to.

Meanwhile in the Daily Star ..............

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/588652/madeleine-mcccann-parents-legal-action-television-show-missing-daughter

Some people don't seem to learn.

[carlymichelle]

Indeed they seem to.

Meanwhile in the Daily Star ..............

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/588652/madeleine-mcccann-parents-legal-action-television-show-missing-daughter

Some people don't seem to learn.

that  isnt new  its been online  for years has it not??

[jassi]

It has but there is now mention of an English soundtrack. Is that new?

[Robittybob1]

that  isnt new  its been online  for years has it not??

What is the show they are worried about?

[stephen25000]

It has but there is now mention of an English soundtrack. Is that new?

There are already versions with English subtitles.

[jassi]

What is the show they are worried about?

An alternative version to the one they peddled, I believe.

Not sure why they should be worried. It's publicity for Madeleine. Is that not good?

[G-Unit]

McCann sceptics never criticise anything Portuguese, it's not the done thing.  Indeed to do so is considered "Lusophobic" I believe.

Firstly, it's quite possible to criticise without being lusophobic. I have posted that the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance wasn't perfect. What I haven't done is blame 'anything Portuguese'. Anyone using lusophobia in an argument has clearly got no case to make and is relying on stirring up hatred to make their point, as has been seen by the comments of gutter journalists. 
 
One by Tony Parsons in the Daily Mirror under the headline "Oh, up yours senor", which was critical of the Portuguese Madeleine McCann investigation, sparked 485 complaints.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7415434.stm

Parsons invited the Portuguese ambassador to “shut your stupid sardine-munching mouth”.
http://www.anorak.co.uk/184181/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-press-complaints-tony-parsons-and-no-news.html/

[Alfie]

Firstly, it's quite possible to criticise without being lusophobic. I have posted that the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance wasn't perfect. What I haven't done is blame 'anything Portuguese'. Anyone using lusophobia in an argument has clearly got no case to make and is relying on stirring up hatred to make their point, as has been seen by the comments of gutter journalists. 
 
One by Tony Parsons in the Daily Mirror under the headline "Oh, up yours senor", which was critical of the Portuguese Madeleine McCann investigation, sparked 485 complaints.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7415434.stm

Parsons invited the Portuguese ambassador to “shut your stupid sardine-munching mouth”.
http://www.anorak.co.uk/184181/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-press-complaints-tony-parsons-and-no-news.html/

Hmmm...missing my point by a mile, on purpose I'm sure.

[Robittybob1]

An alternative version to the one they peddled, I believe.

Not sure why they should be worried. It's publicity for Madeleine. Is that not good?

Maybe that is why they pretend to hate it so much!

[jassi]

I see they are making different headlines in another paper.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2876843/kate-gerry-mccann-cashing-in-anniversary-maddies-disappearance/

Interesting use of the word plotting, rather than planning in the headline. 

After Mitchell's statement it might be difficult for them to benefit from any 'bidding war'

[G-Unit]

graceful acceptance doesn't seem to be your style
mccanns no longer arguidos
SY say they are not suspects
SY explain they accept the abduction scenario


perhaps you should follow your own advice and  accept they are innocent

but of course greatful acceptance is not your style

I am free to point out what I see as discrepancies in the McCann's account of the events of 3rd May 2007. Whether they are arguidos or not, whether they are suspects or not, and what SY say has no bearing on that. No-one knows what happened to Madeleine McCann. Nt the PJ, SY or you, so all possibilities remain open.

[Alfie]

An alternative version to the one they peddled, I believe.

Not sure why they should be worried. It's publicity for Madeleine. Is that not good?

Perhaps you could explain how publicity that Madeleine is dead and her parents hid her body is good for Madeleine?