Author Topic: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.  (Read 270236 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #705 on: February 04, 2017, 01:27:29 PM »
Well now, I believe that the first judgement was perfectly correct.  Or do you think she was a fool?

You can believe what you like . The appeal judges disagreed and they're the ones that count.
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 #706 on: February 04, 2017, 01:28:14 PM »

Oh lol...........can you honestly see the mccs sitting there discussing the book.....

because that is all whoever speak to them will want to know .....

even personally giving the book more publicity ....

they won't do it .is that where the chicken feed comes in ....

The Book is its own failure.  I see no reason for why the McCanns wouldn't want to talk about it.

This Court Judgement has opened a huge can of worms.

Offline xtina

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #707 on: February 04, 2017, 01:30:00 PM »
The Book is its own failure.  I see no reason for why the McCanns wouldn't want to talk about it.

This Court Judgement has opened a huge can of worms.


yes .......for the mccs
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #708 on: February 04, 2017, 01:30:05 PM »
The Book is its own failure.  I see no reason for why the McCanns wouldn't want to talk about it.

This Court Judgement has opened a huge can of worms.

Then you can't possibly be upset by the verdict - except you clearly are.
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 #709 on: February 04, 2017, 01:30:45 PM »
You can believe what you like . The appeal judges disagreed and they're the ones that count.

Do you think that The Judge of The First Instance was a fool?

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #710 on: February 04, 2017, 01:32:35 PM »
Do you think that The Judge of The First Instance was a fool?

Not at all, she merely judged the case incorrectly. This was unanimously  corrected by various judges in 2 higher courts.
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 #711 on: February 04, 2017, 01:38:28 PM »
Then you can't possibly be upset by the verdict - except you clearly are.

No, I am not upset. how could I be?  This isn't personal for me.  I can even see how this decision was arrived at, if Portugal is so determined to hang on to ancient history.  But Portugal will have to move into The Twenty First Century eventually.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #712 on: February 04, 2017, 01:40:08 PM »
Not at all, she merely judged the case incorrectly. This was unanimously  corrected by various judges in 2 higher courts.

So was it just a matter of opinion?

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #713 on: February 04, 2017, 01:41:41 PM »
It was the judgement handed down by the Supreme Court. That you dislike it is neither here nor there.
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 Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #714 on: February 04, 2017, 01:48:02 PM »
You can believe what you like . The appeal judges disagreed and they're the ones that count.

It may be the one that counts at this point but I think the verdict will give the Mccanns story a lot more value than the money that is lost. The McCanns will move on and they have an opprtunity to make a fortune for their fund. t' like a  lot of things in life until you have walked in darkness you cannot see the light ...the Mccanns will come back stronger and they could well have alot to say about amaral and the portuguese justice system which will make very uncomfortable raeding for some

Offline xtina

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #715 on: February 04, 2017, 01:53:36 PM »
It may be the one that counts at this point but I think the verdict will give the Mccanns story a lot more value than the money that is lost. The McCanns will move on and they have an opprtunity to make a fortune for their fund. t' like a  lot of things in life until you have walked in darkness you cannot see the light ...the Mccanns will come back stronger and they could well have alot to say about amaral and the portuguese justice system which will make very uncomfortable raeding for some


you hope davel .................

doesn't mean to say its true .................

works both ways ......G A could have a lot more to say about them .....

after all he was the officer on the case .....

he was privy to info ....you are not
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #716 on: February 04, 2017, 01:54:44 PM »
Thorough and meticulous; unlike those who came after.

I thought she did a really good job.  No bullshit, and perfectly fair to both sides.  She didn't give The McCanns an inch that they weren't entitled to.

But she is of the new generation and hasn't been tainted by past fascism.  I don't suppose that she will worry about it.  Her day will come.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #717 on: February 04, 2017, 01:56:51 PM »
I thought she did a really good job.  No bullshit, and perfectly fair to both sides.  She didn't give The McCanns an inch that they weren't entitled to.

But she is of the new generation and hasn't been tainted by past fascism.  I don't suppose that she will worry about it.  Her day will come.

that is exactly how I read the situation. The younger judge more in tune with the present day vs the older judges rooted in the past ...portugal may come to regret this decision

Offline Eleanor

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #718 on: February 04, 2017, 01:57:43 PM »
It was the judgement handed down by the Supreme Court. That you dislike it is neither here nor there.

I have a legal brain.  To like or dislike doesn't come into the equation.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #719 on: February 04, 2017, 01:59:38 PM »
I have a legal brain.  To like or dislike doesn't come into the equation.

it is a matter as to whether the judgement was just...it wasnt and is not in line with present day Human Rights law