Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.

[G-Unit]

Can I ask you: does the SC judgement give you absolutely no reason to believe that the judges have implied at any point that the McCanns may not actually be innocent and that the abduction theory causes them serious concerns?

The judges made it quite clear that the archiving dispatch is not designed to 'clear' anyone, that it did not 'clear' anyone and that the McCanns cannot claim that it did.

The judges implied nothing.

[Mr Gray]

The judges made it quite clear that the archiving dispatch is not designed to 'clear' anyone, that it did not 'clear' anyone and that the McCanns cannot claim that it did.

The judges implied nothing.

they certainly implied the mccanns could not claim to be innocent and that is the whole point...they should be able to claim they are innocent

[G-Unit]

they certainly implied the mccanns could not claim to be innocent and that is the whole point...they should be able to claim they are innocent

No they didn't. If you believe they did it's time to provide the evidence upon which you are basing your belief.

[Alice Purjorick]

Why in heaven's name would the SC judges wish to inflict any more damage on the McCanns than they have already suffered? Why do supporters think this was personal?

Lack of objectivity coupled with a lack of understanding of the law I guess 

[Alfie]

they certainly implied the mccanns could not claim to be innocent and that is the whole point...they should be able to claim they are innocent

exactly.

[Alfie]

The judges made it quite clear that the archiving dispatch is not designed to 'clear' anyone, that it did not 'clear' anyone and that the McCanns cannot claim that it did.

The judges implied nothing.

Can the McCanns claim that in the eyes of the law they are innocent or does having once been an arguido mean that they cannot make that claim ever again?

[Brietta]

That being the case,then the McCanns and their lawyers need to go above the courts and appeal to the government,its them that make the rules,judges interpret them,there is no higher court than the Supreme one is there?

Perhaps this time round the Supreme Court might manage to rumble up appeal judges who are capable of ruling according to law and not prejudice.

[Mr Gray]

so to those claiming that is the final verdict...last week...lol...

so how long will this hearing take and is there an appeal process if the application is refused

[stephen25000]

Perhaps this time round the Supreme Court might manage to rumble up appeal judges who are capable of ruling according to law and not prejudice.

The judges went by then law.

The Mccann's appeal is a delay tactic and no more than that.

[Mr Gray]

The judges went by then law.

The Mccann's appeal is a delay tactic and no more than that.

we all know you dont really understand portuguese law
if you do could you tell us how long this present complaint will take to be heard

[faithlilly]

Perhaps this time round the Supreme Court might manage to rumble up appeal judges who are capable of ruling according to law and not prejudice.

Why would the judges be prejudiced against the McCanns ? Surely they're not jealous of their good looks and success too ?

[Brietta]

The judges went by then law.

The Mccann's appeal is a delay tactic and no more than that.

Only if it comforts you to say so.

Having been misinformed there was no appeal and being daft enough to accept that despite the sources, I thought the only recourse was to the European court.

Personally I would have given the McCanns only a very slight chance of success in a properly conducted appeal process, and thought they might not even bother appealing that decision.   That was prior to reading the judgement.

The appeal court judges have gone out of their way to overstep the mark in their ruling in every which way it was possible to do so.  They have made it impossible for the injured parties to ignore their judgement.  In my opinion it is worth mentioning that not only has their obvious bias been deliberately injurious to Madeleine and her family it has called Portuguese law into disrepute.

[Brietta]

Why would the judges be prejudiced against the McCanns ? Surely they're not jealous of their good looks and success too ?

I do not have the slightest idea and it may have come as a bit of a surprise to those in authority in Portugal too.  It is my understanding that there is a concerted effort in the Republic to reform all systems of public service ~ one can see why if this abrogation of rights is allowed to pass as precedent into Portuguese jurisprudence.

[stephen25000]

Only if it comforts you to say so.

Having been misinformed there was no appeal and being daft enough to accept that despite the sources, I thought the only recourse was to the European court.

Personally I would have given the McCanns only a very slight chance of success in a properly conducted appeal process, and thought they might not even bother appealing that decision.   That was prior to reading the judgement.

The appeal court judges have gone out of their way to overstep the mark in their ruling in every which way it was possible to do so.  They have made it impossible for the injured parties to ignore their judgement.  In my opinion it is worth mentioning that not only has their obvious bias been deliberately injurious to Madeleine and her family it has called Portuguese law into disrepute.

Your opinion Brietta is of no consequence whatsoever.

This remains a delay tactic.

It won't change the outcome,bat the McCann's paying extra costs.

The McCann's will merely peeve off the Portuguese judiciary and people,  even more than have done already.

[stephen25000]

we all know you dont really understand portuguese law
if you do could you tell us how long this present complaint will take to be heard

Do you ?

and perhaps for once, you can provide a citation.