Author Topic: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.  (Read 269976 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Benice

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #240 on: February 01, 2017, 11:05:32 AM »
A sad day for Madeleine and her family, but I'm not at all surprised at the result.     It has been my contention all along that even if the book did damage the search for Madeleine then without asking everyone who read the book for their reaction to it  - it was not possible to quantify the level of damage done.      Obviously that was a non-starter and so without that proof the court were bound to find the claim to be Not Proven. imo.

Its difficult to understand the thinking behind a Judiciary which seemingly puts the right to Freedom of Expression way above above the right to be Presumed Innocent until Proved Guilty - especially as the former can be used and abused to make a complete mockery of the latter,  IMO.

I remain as baffled as ever re PT's legal system.

The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Offline John

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #241 on: February 01, 2017, 11:08:04 AM »
A sad day for Madeleine and her family, but I'm not at all surprised at the result.     It has been my contention all along that even if the book did damage the search for Madeleine then without asking everyone who read the book for their reaction to it  - it was not possible to quantify the level of damage done.      Obviously that was a non-starter and so without that proof the court were bound to find the claim to be Not Proven. imo.

Its difficult to understand the thinking behind a Judiciary which seemingly puts the right to Freedom of Expression way above above the right to be Presumed Innocent until Proved Guilty - especially as the former can be used and abused to make a complete mockery of the latter,  IMO.

I remain as baffled as ever re PT's legal system.

To be serious for a moment, I think the problem is that they just don't know what happened to Madeleine.  The courts have to be very careful not to render any judgement which could come back to bite them on the backside at a later date.  It's the same with SY and the PJ.  If they were to state that she was dead and she turned up alive and well, wouldn't they look a right bunch of Charlies.  The reverse is also true.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2017, 11:10:09 AM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #242 on: February 01, 2017, 11:10:27 AM »

I will be issuing Warnings to any further goading and sniping.

Offline carlymichelle

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #243 on: February 01, 2017, 11:10:49 AM »
To be serious for a moment, I think the problem is that they just don't know what happened to Madeleine.  The courts have to be very careful not to render any judgement which could come back to bite them on the backside at a later date.  It's the same with SY and the PJ.  If they were to state that she was dead and she turned up alive and well, wouldn't they look a right bunch of Charlies.

exactly   what if   they accepted   the abduction and  maddies body  turned   up  somewhere else besides portugal ? im  not  saying it will of course but you know  what  i  mean   thats why the police  have to keepa open  mind
« Last Edit: February 01, 2017, 11:21:23 AM by carlymichelle »

Offline Brietta

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #244 on: February 01, 2017, 11:14:41 AM »


It is not the end of the road for the McCanns ... nor will it ever be until they find out what happened to Madeleine.

At the moment it matters not because the Policia Judiciaria and Scotland Yard are still looking for her and to find that out. 

If they are unsuccessful and one sincerely hopes that won't be the case, Madeleine's parents will be without the financial resources to keep their own enquiries open or divert the money to others.
Some will find contentment in that thought.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2017, 11:21:39 AM by Eleanor »
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline faithlilly

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #245 on: February 01, 2017, 11:17:57 AM »
It is not the end of the road for the McCanns ... nor will it ever be until they find out what happened to Madeleine.

At the moment it matters not because the Policia Judiciaria and Scotland Yard are still looking for her and to find that out. 

If they are unsuccessful and one sincerely hopes that won't be the case, Madeleine's parents will be without the financial resources to keep their own enquiries open or divert the money to others.
Some will find contentment in that thought.

And some will think it was absolutely unnecessary.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline carlymichelle

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #246 on: February 01, 2017, 11:19:07 AM »
And some will think it was absolutely unnecessary.

exactly  faithlily  what did the  mcanns get out of this  after    8 years?  they lost  and they owe people lots of  money  i wouldnt think it  was worth it would  you??

Offline faithlilly

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #247 on: February 01, 2017, 11:25:15 AM »
exactly  faithlily  what did the  mcanns get out of this  after    8 years?  they lost  and they owe people lots of  money  i wouldnt think it  was worth it would  you??

Indeed.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #248 on: February 01, 2017, 11:32:19 AM »
Because McCann doubters think the McCanns hid their child's body they don't have the imagination or the empathy (sorry to use that word, but it's the only one that will do) to put themselves in the place of innocent people who have lost their child and who believe she may still be alive, people who have a best-selling book written about them that baldly states she is dead and accuses them of hiding her body.   They cannot understand why this would drive such people to seek legal redress.  It's not about arrogance or greed, it's about fairness and putting right a wrong, and above all about not ensuring that their child is not written off as dead and gone.  The doubters will NEVER accept or understand this because of their firm belief that Amaral's theory was broadly correct.   

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #249 on: February 01, 2017, 11:35:11 AM »
Posters on here and elsewhere  are still distressing the twins with their nasty posts directed at their parents
Tho posters obviously don't care

Offline faithlilly

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #250 on: February 01, 2017, 11:37:24 AM »
Because McCann doubters think the McCanns hid their child's body they don't have the imagination or the empathy (sorry to use that word, but it's the only one that will do) to put themselves in the place of innocent people who have lost their child and who believe she may still be alive, people who have a best-selling book written about them that baldly states she is dead and accuses them of hiding her body.   They cannot understand why this would drive such people to seek legal redress.  It's not about arrogance or greed, it's about fairness and putting right a wrong, and above all about not ensuring that their child is not written off as dead and gone.  The doubters will NEVER accept or understand this because of their firm belief that Amaral's theory was broadly correct.

Do you really think it was worth depleting the fund in such a way? Now if OG does draw to a close they will have no money to resurrect their private investigation. Was being seen a right really worth that ?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline John

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #251 on: February 01, 2017, 11:41:40 AM »
Because McCann doubters think the McCanns hid their child's body they don't have the imagination or the empathy (sorry to use that word, but it's the only one that will do) to put themselves in the place of innocent people who have lost their child and who believe she may still be alive, people who have a best-selling book written about them that baldly states she is dead and accuses them of hiding her body.   They cannot understand why this would drive such people to seek legal redress.  It's not about arrogance or greed, it's about fairness and putting right a wrong, and above all about not ensuring that their child is not written off as dead and gone.  The doubters will NEVER accept or understand this because of their firm belief that Amaral's theory was broadly correct.

Do you ever wonder why as parents of a missing child they invoke such distrust? 
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #252 on: February 01, 2017, 11:43:12 AM »
Do you really think it was worth depleting the fund in such a way? Now if OG does draw to a close they will have no money to resurrect their private investigation. Was being seen a right really worth that ?

The McCann's obviously got some real bad legal advice and by all accounts paid handsomely for it.

Add that to the bad private detectives and you have one big sorry mess!
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #253 on: February 01, 2017, 11:43:53 AM »
Do you ever wonder why as parents of a missing child they invoke such distrust?
Why don't you tell us? 

Offline carlymichelle

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #254 on: February 01, 2017, 11:44:39 AM »
The McCann's obviously got some real bad legal advice and by all accounts paid handsomely for it.

exactly    john  but that isnt   GA  fault is it??    the mcanns didnt have to keep  going  after him  did they??