Author Topic: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.  (Read 299521 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #795 on: February 04, 2017, 10:08:52 PM »
 
yes they are all in the accounts

Not those accessible to the public, they're not. Do you have access to a different set?
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 Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #796 on: February 04, 2017, 10:09:28 PM »
Some supporters seem to be living in their own post truth world.


I know its very hard for you to accept the reality of the situation...the verdict in portugal has caused the mccanns value re interviews to absolutely skyrocket...and what they have to tell could be absolute dynamite

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #797 on: February 04, 2017, 10:10:42 PM »

I know its very hard for you to accept the reality of the situation...the verdict in portugal has caused the mccanns value re interviews to absolutely skyrocket...and what they have to tell could be absolute dynamite

QED
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #798 on: February 04, 2017, 10:13:53 PM »

I know its very hard for you to accept the reality of the situation...the verdict in portugal has caused the mccanns value re interviews to absolutely skyrocket...and what they have to tell could be absolute dynamite

We have heard the Mccann's story repeated again and again.

Offline carlymichelle

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #799 on: February 04, 2017, 10:16:44 PM »
We have heard the Mccann's story repeated again and again.

i dont think the supporters will ever  accept the reality of this

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #800 on: February 04, 2017, 10:50:27 PM »
bidding war now being reported in australia

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #801 on: February 05, 2017, 07:16:53 AM »
The unhappiness continues.

Offline xtina

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #802 on: February 05, 2017, 10:43:40 AM »
A small group of people who didn't understand the evidence made his appeal possible
Not the UK public
The McCanns can make a fortune but you and others don't want to accept that because you hate them so much
Your hatred is unnatural

what mine ......and hundreds of thousand others.not hatred though [don't like what they did ....and are still doing ]

now comonnnnnnnnnn........a small group of people raised ...that amount ......including ...police officers.
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 John

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #803 on: February 05, 2017, 11:47:18 AM »
Some free rein has been afforded on this thread but despite this dozens of posts have been removed.  The nonsense stops now otherwise this thread will be closed.  TY
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 xtina

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #804 on: February 05, 2017, 11:59:13 AM »
you seem to have another fixation ...this forum is nothing to do with trump... I wont be popular but I quite like him... I like man who calls a fool a fool

what and agrees with torture ......now i thought you was against all that '''

so it only applies to G A and your hatred for him by the sounds of it ............
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 carlymichelle

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #805 on: February 05, 2017, 12:01:43 PM »
what and agrees with torture ......now i thought you was against all that '''

so it only applies to G A and your hatred for him by the sounds of it ............

isnt it hypocritical that supporters  say we hate the mcanns (  which we  dont)   and yet they openly admit they hate amaral??

Offline John

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #806 on: February 05, 2017, 12:02:55 PM »
The Sun stuff does not seem to have gone to script.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2238940/madeleine-mccann-what-happened-disappearance-sightings/


"On the night she was taken police received two separate potential sightings from members of the public -- however one was fully ruled out as being a holidaymaker with his daughter".
So what about the other one chief?

As usual the Sun has their facts wrong.  Tannerman was never 'fully ruled out' as asserted by the tabloid rag.
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 xtina

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #807 on: February 05, 2017, 12:12:33 PM »
isnt it hypocritical that supporters  say we hate the mcanns (  which we  dont)   and yet they openly admit they hate amaral??

spot on carlymichelle

papers now calling him Victorious detective ..not the bungling cop it seem they are warming to him

I think the readers will want to know more about him ...than the mccs .........

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/763253/Detective-writing-new-Maddie-McCann-book
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 John

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #808 on: February 05, 2017, 12:15:45 PM »
So you don't think that acquiring a criminal conviction, committing adultery, swindling his own brother,  abusing his power whilst a policemen by breaking the law himself  and having his name mentioned by Amnesty International under the Torture section -  has tarnished his name in any way whatsoever?   Not even a tad?

There's no answer to that.

An excellent point.  These actions were of his own doing.
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 Alice Purjorick

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #809 on: February 05, 2017, 12:24:12 PM »
As usual the Sun has their facts wrong.  Tannerman was never 'fully ruled out' as asserted by the tabloid rag.

Only in the same sense that a lawyer will only identify a corpse as "that is the person introduced to me as......."
I know that and you know that but The Sun going off piste?
They will find a story and if they can't they will make one up. It may be Sr Amaral's turn to be championed by The Sun in their quest for a story that will sell copy. After all it is a bit "man bites dog" at present isn't it?
(please forgive the use of the "D" word  ?{)(**)
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey