Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.

[Alfie]

It's not perfect but the nearest equivalent.

You're making it up, unless you can provide a cite that such a status exists in law, to describe someone who has been investigated many years ago for a crime and no charges brought, ie: neither innocent, nor guilty but...?

[Brietta]

maybe back under suspicion ............

Not anywhere in the civilised world ... and one suspects not even in Portugal.

[Alfie]

Presumption of innocence is the principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty.  Not considered a little bit dodgy, or hmmm...I bet they're not letting on the whole story or haha they failed to prove their innocence.  Considered innocent until proven guilty The onus is not on anyone to prove their innocence, it should go without saying that in law one IS innocent until proven otherwise.  It seems the PT Judiciary don't understand this concept.

[jassi]

Only a problem for the mCcanns, who are in this position,  not for the rest of us.

[Alfie]

Only a problem for the mCcanns, not for the rest of us.

And for you and your family if you ever find yourself on the receiving end of Portuguese justice. 

[Brietta]

There is a big difference between proved innocent and presumption of innocence.

The archiving report proved the McCanns innocent of neglect in Portuguese law, to all intents and purposes, irrespective of what others might think.

The McCanns are entitled to a presumption of innocence in anything more serious re Madeleine's disappearance, but such a presumption does not prove them innocent.

If a suspect is investigated and is released without charge and suspect status removed ... that person is innocent.

[Eleanor]

Only a problem for the mCcanns, who are in this position,  not for the rest of us.

So long as you don't come under scrutiny of Portuguese Law.  Unfortunately The Portuguese People do.

[jassi]

And for you and your family if you ever find yourself on the receiving end of Portuguese justice.

Portugal is not a place I shall ever visit.

[Eleanor]

Portugal is not a place I shall ever visit.

Very wise, if you ask me.

[Alfie]

Portugal is not a place I shall ever visit.

Me neither, especially not now.  What a dump.

[Brietta]

And for you and your family if you ever find yourself on the receiving end of Portuguese justice.

In most places in the world the law is dictated by precedent.  In Portugal are the McCanns unique in having the law tailored to disadvantage solely them in yet another unique aspect of Madeleine's case?
In my opinion this verdict stinks to high heaven.

[ShiningInLuz]

Presumption of innocence is the principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty.  Not considered a little bit dodgy, or hmmm...I bet they're not letting on the whole story or haha they failed to prove their innocence.  Considered innocent until proven guilty The onus is not on anyone to prove their innocence, it should go without saying that in law one IS innocent until proven otherwise.  It seems the PT Judiciary don't understand this concept.

I think the PT Judiciary understand Portuguese law better than the rest of us on the forum stuck together.

They ruled against the McCann claim.  This does not make the McCanns guilty of anything, other than perhaps choosing a poor course of action.

[xtina]

Presumption of innocence is the principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty.  Not considered a little bit dodgy, or hmmm...I bet they're not letting on the whole story or haha they failed to prove their innocence.  Considered innocent until proven guilty The onus is not on anyone to prove their innocence, it should go without saying that in law one IS innocent until proven otherwise.  It seems the PT Judiciary don't understand this concept.

that is in a court of law ............

where they have not been yet ....

according to them ....maddie was abducted ...

accordion to G A she wasn't

GA .....won the right to say maddie was not abducted ......tdah

[jassi]

I think the PT Judiciary understand Portuguese law better than the rest of us on the forum stuck together.

They ruled against the McCann claim.  This does not make the McCanns guilty of anything, other than perhaps choosing a poor course of action.

Too right.
Not only do we have armchair detectives, but we have armchair advocates as well . What a hoot   

[Alfie]

The judgement (unless poorly translated) seems to suggest that Amaral was within his rights to express his opinion in his books because his right to freedom of expression trumped the McCanns' right to a not be libelled and in any case  the McCanns had not been proven innocent, so there.  What a load of cobblers.