seems the mccs may be re interviewed
http://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/mccanns-not-cleared.html“It should be added that we are before an archival decision by the Public Ministry, which is liable of change by many ways.
As such, besides appealing via jurisdiction, through the opening of an instruction (CPP art.287º), and to making a claim to the higher hierarchy (CPP art. 378º), the inquiry can be reponed if new elements of proof appear that invalidate the grounds invoked by the Public Ministry in the archival dispatch (CPP art. 279º)-
Besides, that is said in the “Note to the Media” disclosed by the PGR on 21/7/08 in which was announced that it had been determined the archival of the inquiry and informed that the “same could be reopened, by initiative of the Public Ministry ou by request of an interested party, if new elements of proof would appear that originated serious, pertinent and consequent diligences” (#14 of proven facts).
In this way, not being the alluded archival dispatch a written decision on a strict sense, nor assuming definitive aspect, much less would be justified the invoking of the principle of presumption of innocence to restrict freedom of expression.” (page 69 of sentence, 1st picture of post)
And:
“And let it not be said, also, that the appellants were cleared by the archival dispatch of the crime-process.
In truth, the alluded dispatch wasn’t pronounced because the Public Ministry gained the conviction that the appellants did not commit any crime (as by nº1 of the art. 277º of the CPP)
Such archival, in the case, was determined because it wasn’t possible for the Public Ministry to obtain enough legally admissible indicia of the practice of a crime by the appellants (as by nº2, art. 277º of CPP)
There is, then, a significant difference, and not merely of semantics, between the grounds legally admissible of the archival dispatch.
It doesn’t seem, then, acceptable that it should be considered that the referred dispatch, grounded on insufficiency of indicia, should be equivalent to the proof of innocence.
We consider, therefore, that the invoking of the breaking of the principle of presumption of innocence, should not be received, not weighing such principle in the decision that has to be taken.” (page 70 of sentence)
Very clearly and very explicitly the Supreme Justice Court is saying that the McCanns have NOT been cleared.
Note, it has not said the McCanns were guilty. It is just saying that they have not been considered by the Portuguese Justice System as innocent.
We do believe that this is historic and rebates definitely all those saying that the couple was cleared by the Portuguese justice.
On January 31 2017 this was set straight.
Posted by Textusa at 10:49
Madeleine CaseTweets @McCannCaseTweet
I can't breathe, judge suggest to Attorney General McCanns be re-interviewed as Tavares de Almeida report is part of proven facts #mccann
