Author Topic: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.  (Read 253378 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #435 on: February 02, 2017, 06:32:46 PM »
Amaral's book will never be published in Angleterre, because it is so full of Libel.

Personally, I don't care.  People aren't half daft.

And now Portugal is going to have to live with this. It will not end well.

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #436 on: February 02, 2017, 06:35:12 PM »
Amaral's book will never be published in Angleterre, because it is so full of Libel.

Personally, I don't care.  People aren't half daft.

And now Portugal is going to have to live with this. It will not end well.

No, I don't think it will
A lot of tiny tears to be shed before this is finally  put to bed.
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline Eleanor

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #437 on: February 02, 2017, 06:36:54 PM »
Whatever helps you get through the day.

I suspect that my day is so much better than yours.  I don't have a problem with my day, but I think you might.

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #438 on: February 02, 2017, 06:38:59 PM »
I suspect that my day is so much better than yours.  I don't have a problem with my day, but I think you might.

You think wrong. For me every day is a doddle.
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline carlymichelle

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #439 on: February 02, 2017, 06:39:45 PM »
You think wrong. For me every day is a doddle.

same   the mcanns  problems dont affect me in the slightest they brought them on themselves

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #440 on: February 02, 2017, 06:47:37 PM »
out of adversity......I think the mccanns will come back stronger...sometimes it takes a kick in the teeth to give you the energy and desire to carry on...anyone who writes off the mcCanns is a fool imo...they will continue the search for their daughter and I wish them the best of luck

Offline G-Unit

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #441 on: February 02, 2017, 06:50:24 PM »
So just to clarify the fund is not liable for any costs but under the terms could pay the costs if the directors chooses

The question then arising is if the directors are acting in the company's best interest financially, which is one of their duties. If paying the costs of two of the director's litigation bankrupts the company that is not in the company's best interest, is it?
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #442 on: February 02, 2017, 06:52:12 PM »
The question then arising is if the directors are acting in the company's best interest financially, which is one of their duties. If paying the costs of two of the director's litigation bankrupts the company that is not in the company's best interest, is it?

Can a bankrupt be a company director?
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #443 on: February 02, 2017, 06:53:56 PM »
Can a bankrupt be a company director?

I don't believe so.

Offline Erngath

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #444 on: February 02, 2017, 06:55:44 PM »
out of adversity......I think the mccanns will come back stronger...sometimes it takes a kick in the teeth to give you the energy and desire to carry on...anyone who writes off the mcCanns is a fool imo...they will continue the search for their daughter and I wish them the best of luck

Well said Davel,
 I too wish them the best of luck. I'm sure once they have recovered from this unjust decision they will continue with the search for their much loved daughter. I wish them good health, strength and much support from their friends and family.
Deal with the failings of others as gently as with your own.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #445 on: February 02, 2017, 06:56:33 PM »
No, I don't think it will
A lot of tiny tears to be shed before this is finally  put to bed.

I do actually understand this particulier facet of Portuguese Law, although not with any certainty, probably because it is only an interpretation.  But at least I can see how it came about.

I will remain entirely on the side of The McCanns, and continue to hope that Madeleine will be found alive and unharmed, within the bounds of what is possible.

There is nothing that nasty people can say to me that will lead me to believe otherwise.           

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #446 on: February 02, 2017, 06:59:06 PM »
Well said Davel,
 I too wish them the best of luck. I'm sure once they have recovered from this unjust decision they will continue with the search for their much loved daughter. I wish them good health, strength and much support from their friends and family.

When did they last search for Madeleine ?

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #447 on: February 02, 2017, 07:00:49 PM »
yes they can

You can dream, but then reality bites, as it has this week.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #448 on: February 02, 2017, 07:03:30 PM »

A pertinent question, as we are constantly told the McCann's search for jet, but there is scant evidence of that.

They were preoccupied with going after Amaral, and look how that has turned out.

Meanwhile ,  no trace of Madeleine and OG will be shelved as I predicted without finding a thing.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2017, 12:32:18 AM by ShiningInLuz »

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #449 on: February 02, 2017, 07:03:50 PM »
So just to clarify the fund is not liable for any costs but under the terms could pay the costs if the directors chooses

Yes. But see G-Unit's earlier post.
As the Sun went off piste a bit yesterday I would have a bit of the six to fours on them snooping in that area to see if there is a good front pager for them to sell more copy. One way or another the McCann name still seems to sell copy.
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey