Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.

[Mr Gray]

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

The court case has nothing to do with the McCanns innocence
You should read it
The McCanns are not suspects in any investigation

[stephen25000]

The court case has nothing to do with the McCanns innocence
You should read it
The McCanns are not suspects in any investigation

You do not know, if anyone removed Madeleine from the apartment, or not.

Innocence or guilt is not up to davel to determine.

 A court  would do that, if charges were brought, and I do not see that happening to anyone.

[Mr Gray]

You do not know, if anyone removed Madeleine from the apartment, or not.

Innocence or guilt is not up to davel to determine.

 A court  would do that, if charges were brought, and I do not see that happening to anyone.

So they are innocent until proven guilty

[stephen25000]

So they are innocent until proven guilty

They haven't been charged dave.

[Mr Gray]

They haven't been charged dave.

They don't need to be charged to benefit from the presumption of innocence
Read the European Law

[G-Unit]

They don't need to be charged to benefit from the presumption of innocence
Read the European Law

Which article of the European Convention on Human Rights are you referring to?

[Benice]

Let's get this clear, Gonçalo Amaral did not lie in court, that would be perjury. He was charged and convicted of "false testimony" to the police when he was questioned by them during the investigation into Leonor Cipriano's torture case. This was somewhat strange as all he could tell the police was what the others told him about the incident in Faro police station since he was not a witness to it.

So Amaral was lied to by his men - and because he believed them he ended up with a prison sentence and a criminal conviction?  Is that what you are saying?

If that is the case why haven't the officers who lied to him about the incident been prosecuted for attempting to pervert the course of justice via him - and why hasn't Amaral sued them for lying to him thus causing him to be prosecuted and found guilty of a crime?    He must know who they are -as presumably he didn't have a bag over his head at any time. 

[stephen25000]

They don't need to be charged to benefit from the presumption of innocence
Read the European Law

What are they innocent of Dave ?

Innocent of leaving their three children in a vulnerable situation, open to many possible dangers?

[Robittybob1]

They haven't been charged dave.

They have been accused through Amaral's book and DVD.

[stephen25000]

They have been accused through Amaral's book and DVD.

Just a thesis Rob, they haven't been charged.

[Robittybob1]

Just a thesis Rob, they haven't been charged.

The court can find you not guilty but once Amaral sinks his teeth in he won't let go.

[stephen25000]

The court can find you not guilty but once Amaral sinks his teeth in he won't let go.

It was the McCann's Rob who wouldn't let go.

[G-Unit]

It was the McCann's Rob who wouldn't let go.

According to one of their 'journalist' mates they're still threatening to sue people. Do they realise how ridiculous that makes them look?

[stephen25000]

According to one of their 'journalist' mates they're still threatening to sue people. Do they realise how ridiculous that makes them look?

Evidently not.

[Robittybob1]

According to one of their 'journalist' mates they're still threatening to sue people. Do they realise how ridiculous that makes them look?

And let's hope they win this time.  But that must be like a red flag to a bull.