Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.

[pathfinder73]

Do you not think that linking to a cite called "Faked Abduction" is libellous? 

The webmaster should have called it 48 Questions No Comment F*** the Police

[Brietta]

Unfortunately, this cr*p really is out there, but just not, thank goodness, in the UK media.

Someone at Stop the Myths who lives in Holland says it's all over their media.

Probably from the same sources ... it seems Correio da Manhã has cornered the market in Portugal ... I can't find anyone else leading with it.

Quote
The Supreme Court ruled that the couple Kate and Gerry McCann were made an accused in the case of the disappearance of their daughter Maddie, for "founded suspicion" of having committed a crime. The statements are included in the ruling of the court that acquitted the former coordinator of PJ Gonçalo Amaral to pay half a million euros to the parents of the girl who disappeared almost a decade ago, according to Correio da Manhã.

The couple McCann lost the appeal filed in the Supreme Court of Justice against Gonçalo Amaral, author of the book "Maddie: The Truth of the Lie." In the book, the former PJ inspector raised suspicions that the child's parents were involved in the abduction. Not only did the court give the former inspector a reason, but they reminded him that insufficient evidence is not the same as proof of innocence.

"The defendant [Gonçalo Amaral] expressed his opinion in the light of the evidence and evidence gathered in the investigation initiated by the disappearance of Madeleine McCann on 3 May 2007. (...) Applicants [Kate and Gerry McCann] have been indicted in a criminal investigation. What implies that there was a well-founded suspicion of having committed crimes or crimes, "can be read in the ruling to which Correio da Manhã had access.
http://www.jornaleconomico.sapo.pt/noticias/justica-supremo-arrasa-inocencia-dos-mccann-120311


Extraordinary ruling which flies in the face of logic.  It will be interesting to see how it will be addressed.

[xtina]

  i posted that and it got  ignored

i think the point was carleymichelle..........it was in the Correio da Manha today

when Brietta is asking for cites on reporting .....i was about to post the same thing

[Alice Purjorick]

In countries where the rule of law is respected, there is never a requirement on those accused to 'prove' their innocence; rather, on their accusers to prove their guilt.

The whole "case" against Kate and Gerry pretty much rests on the incompetent deployment of one dog (in particular).

Look on the positive side.
If they had been playing on a different pitch they might have won.
If the Titanic had had radar it might not have hit the iceberg.
The sad facts, however, are they weren't and it didn't have...............................................

Another idle thought passing through my mind:
If the supporters here had been in charge of the Richard III thingy they would be well on the way to having excavated half of Leicestershire in their efforts to find a straight one.

[Alfie]

So basically what it means is - if you are made an arguido, but the case against you is shelved due to a lack of evidence, you can legitimately be tried in the court of public opinion by anyone who wishes to write a scurrilous book about you, based on a "thesis" which has no actual evidence to support it.   That all seems pretty just, doesn't it?

[faithlilly]

Oh, haven't you heard?  No one's interested in the McCanns anymore and stories about them don't sell papers, they only put them on the front page because the stories are free.   I learned that from Faithlilly so it must be true.   

Obviously Clarence has found a way to spin this on yet hence no mention of it in the U.K. press 

[jassi]

Probably from the same sources ... it seems Correio da Manhã has cornered the market in Portugal ... I can't find anyone else leading with it.

Quote
The Supreme Court ruled that the couple Kate and Gerry McCann were made an accused in the case of the disappearance of their daughter Maddie, for "founded suspicion" of having committed a crime. The statements are included in the ruling of the court that acquitted the former coordinator of PJ Gonçalo Amaral to pay half a million euros to the parents of the girl who disappeared almost a decade ago, according to Correio da Manhã.

The couple McCann lost the appeal filed in the Supreme Court of Justice against Gonçalo Amaral, author of the book "Maddie: The Truth of the Lie." In the book, the former PJ inspector raised suspicions that the child's parents were involved in the abduction. Not only did the court give the former inspector a reason, but they reminded him that insufficient evidence is not the same as proof of innocence.

"The defendant [Gonçalo Amaral] expressed his opinion in the light of the evidence and evidence gathered in the investigation initiated by the disappearance of Madeleine McCann on 3 May 2007. (...) Applicants [Kate and Gerry McCann] have been indicted in a criminal investigation. What implies that there was a well-founded suspicion of having committed crimes or crimes, "can be read in the ruling to which Correio da Manhã had access.
http://www.jornaleconomico.sapo.pt/noticias/justica-supremo-arrasa-inocencia-dos-mccann-120311


Extraordinary ruling which flies in the face of logic. It will be interesting to see how it will be addressed.

Who do you have in mind?

[xtina]

Probably from the same sources ... it seems Correio da Manhã has cornered the market in Portugal ... I can't find anyone else leading with it.

Quote
The Supreme Court ruled that the couple Kate and Gerry McCann were made an accused in the case of the disappearance of their daughter Maddie, for "founded suspicion" of having committed a crime. The statements are included in the ruling of the court that acquitted the former coordinator of PJ Gonçalo Amaral to pay half a million euros to the parents of the girl who disappeared almost a decade ago, according to Correio da Manhã.

The couple McCann lost the appeal filed in the Supreme Court of Justice against Gonçalo Amaral, author of the book "Maddie: The Truth of the Lie." In the book, the former PJ inspector raised suspicions that the child's parents were involved in the abduction. Not only did the court give the former inspector a reason, but they reminded him that insufficient evidence is not the same as proof of innocence.

"The defendant [Gonçalo Amaral] expressed his opinion in the light of the evidence and evidence gathered in the investigation initiated by the disappearance of Madeleine McCann on 3 May 2007. (...) Applicants [Kate and Gerry McCann] have been indicted in a criminal investigation. What implies that there was a well-founded suspicion of having committed crimes or crimes, "can be read in the ruling to which Correio da Manhã had access.
http://www.jornaleconomico.sapo.pt/noticias/justica-supremo-arrasa-inocencia-dos-mccann-120311


Extraordinary ruling which flies in the face of logic.  It will be interesting to see how it will be addressed.

probably waiting for the written verdict to be released


the main thing is here almost everyone knows.... the judges ruled against the mccs ...

probably the nearest thing to justice ...maddie will get ....

but at least it has been shown .the abduction is not as cut and dried as some think .......

and the mccs was not actually cleared ....as some think..........

seems that should go on the myth link.....

Court acquits Gonçalo Amaral and points out that the couple was constituted as arguidos (suspects) with a "well-founded suspicion" of having committed a crime.

[Brietta]

probably waiting for the written verdict to be released


the main thing is here almost everyone knows.... the judges ruled against the mccs ...

probably the nearest thing to justice ...maddie will get ....

but at least it has been shown .the abduction is not as cut and dried as some think .......

and the mccs was not actually cleared ....as some think..........

seems that should go on the myth link.....

Court acquits Gonçalo Amaral and points out that the couple was constituted as arguidos (suspects) with a "well-founded suspicion" of having committed a crime.

What is being promoted on the blogs and Correio da Manhã  if not the written verdict?

[Eleanor]

Please let's remember that Presumption of Innocence is still part of British Law.

[Brietta]

probably waiting for the written verdict to be released


the main thing is here almost everyone knows.... the judges ruled against the mccs ...

probably the nearest thing to justice ...maddie will get ....

but at least it has been shown .the abduction is not as cut and dried as some think .......

and the mccs was not actually cleared ....as some think..........

seems that should go on the myth link.....

Court acquits Gonçalo Amaral and points out that the couple was constituted as arguidos (suspects) with a "well-founded suspicion" of having committed a crime.

I think what has been shown by the highest court in Portugal is an incompetent ruling out of step with decency and human rights accompanied by news manipulation.
Did anything really change with the Revolução dos Cravos?

[Erngath]

Please let's remember that Presumption of Innocence is still part of British Law.

And thank God for that.

[jassi]

I think what has been shown by the highest court in Portugal is an incompetent ruling out of step with decency and human rights accompanied by news manipulation.
Did anything really change with the Revolução dos Cravos?

Only in the minds of a few, I fancy. Most will recognise the competence of the Portuguese State to determine its own affairs.

[xtina]

What is being promoted on the blogs and Correio da Manhã  if not the written verdict?

i think the mccs are not very popular in portugal .........not big news ......

they know what the verdict is ...................what they expected ...no big deal for them ....

i would say ....the less they hear about the mccs the better...........

the translation is what i should have said .....and of course ...that is for the U K press....not Portugal

[xtina]

wouldn't you think the mccs have enough on there plate as it is .........

with the court judgment ...without getting involved in this ........



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-blast-appalling-9777961




Madeleine McCann's parents blast "appalling" and "insensitive" BBC drama about fake kidnap