Portugal Supreme Court: The McCanns are not cleared in Maddie Case

[G-Unit]

As their is no precise legal definition of cleared then I can say they were cleared

It was somewhat careless of the McCann's lawyer to use such an imprecise term to support her arguments, was it not?

[Alfie]

So, say this went to court, the McCanns tried for hiding their child's body and they were found not guilty because of a lack of compelling evidence, would that still mean they hadn't been cleared?  Do McCann critics actually believe it is just that someone who was once an arguido many years ago in a case that has yet to be resolved should not have the right to be considered innocent by the PT judiciary? If you think this is the proper and just way to go about things perhaps you could explain it, cos I sure as hell don't get it.

[Mr Gray]

we don't know what word Duarte used
What we do know is the McCanns have never been formally accused of anything so have not had chance to be cleared in the eyes of the law
The Supreme Court have denied them their right to be considered innocent and will be corrected by the ECHR
The Portuguese legal system has no respect for justice and that's why there was no chance of Maddie ever getting jusstice
The sceptics seem more interested in bashing the McCanns than seeing justice for Maddie
Only the McCanns and OG are looking for this

[Alfie]

we don't know what word Duarte used
What we do know is the McCanns have never been formally accused of anything so have not had chance to be cleared in the eyes of the law
The Supreme Court have denied them their right to be considered innocent and will be corrected by the ECHR
The Portuguese legal system has no respect for justice and that's why there was no chance of Maddie ever getting jusstice
The sceptics seem more interested in bashing the McCanns than seeing justice for Maddie
Only the McCanns and OG are looking for this

That's a pretty neat summation.

[Benice]

So, say this went to court, the McCanns tried for hiding their child's body and they were found not guilty because of a lack of compelling evidence, would that still mean they hadn't been cleared?  Do McCann critics actually believe it is just that someone who was once an arguido many years ago in a case that has yet to be resolved should not have the right to be considered innocent by the PT judiciary? If you think this is the proper and just way to go about things perhaps you could explain it, cos I sure as hell don't get it.

The judges appear not to have even considered the one most compelling reason why sufficient evidence could not be found against the  McCanns -  and that is because no such evidence existed to be found in the first place.   How can anyone prove the non existence of non-existent evidence? 

Quite obviously it's not possible to prove a negative and for Judges to effectively turn a blind eye to that fact - and insodoing damage the McCann's absolute right to the presumption of innocence until proved guilty, is a million miles away from what civilised societies regard as Just.   

AIMHO

[stephen25000]

we don't know what word Duarte used
What we do know is the McCanns have never been formally accused of anything so have not had chance to be cleared in the eyes of the law
The Supreme Court have denied them their right to be considered innocent and will be corrected by the ECHR
The Portuguese legal system has no respect for justice and that's why there was no chance of Maddie ever getting jusstice
The sceptics seem more interested in bashing the McCanns than seeing justice for Maddie
Only the McCanns and OG are looking for this

Total rubbish, as per normal.

Another poster has noted the Mccanns and their 'followers', will come out on the offensive.

Trouble is, the horse has left the stable.

[stephen25000]

If the McCann's try the Supreme Court, they won't just be left with egg on their face.

[carlymichelle]

Total rubbish, as per normal.

Another poster has noted the Mccanns and their 'followers', will come out on the offensive.

Trouble is, the horse has left the stable.

it bolted  years ago didnt it? we know now thanks to the portugese courts and the mcanns sueing  amaral

[slartibartfast]

we don't know what word Duarte used
What we do know is the McCanns have never been formally accused of anything so have not had chance to be cleared in the eyes of the law
The Supreme Court have denied them their right to be considered innocent and will be corrected by the ECHR
The Portuguese legal system has no respect for justice and that's why there was no chance of Maddie ever getting jusstice
The sceptics seem more interested in bashing the McCanns than seeing justice for Maddie
Only the McCanns and OG are looking for this

No one has denied them the right to be considered innocent, the judges just corrected Duarte's mistaken belief that they had been cleared.

[Mr Gray]

Total rubbish, as per normal.

Another poster has noted the Mccanns and their 'followers', will come out on the offensive.

Trouble is, the horse has left the stable.

Simply calling posts rubbish with no counter argument shows your lack of logic and joined up thinking
But if that's all you are capable of you have no choice

[carlymichelle]

No one has denied them the right to be considered innocent, the judges just corrected Duarte's mistaken belief that they had been cleared.

their lawyer got it  wrong   all those years  ago  that is no one elses fault but hers

[slartibartfast]

Simply calling posts rubbish with no counter argument shows your lack of logic and joined up thinking
But if that's all you are capable of you have no choice

It's a bit like stating the McCanns innocence or guilt without supporting information.

[Mr Gray]

If the McCann's try the Supreme Court, they won't just be left with egg on their face.

The Supreme Court...LOL

[carlymichelle]

It's a bit like stating the McCanns innocence or guilt without supporting information.

right    and he has always said they are innocent without proof  has he not??

[Robittybob1]

It's a bit like stating the McCanns innocence or guilt without supporting information.

Fourteen months after she disappeared, Portugal's attorney-general, Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro, said the police had found no evidence linking the McCanns, or fellow suspect Robert Murat, to Madeleine's suspected abduction.
"The case involving Madeleine McCann will be shelved following the decision by the two magistrates in charge that no evidence was found to implicate the arguidos," his statement read.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2439530/Madeleine-McCann-Kate-and-Gerry-cleared-of-arguido-status-by-Portuguese-police.html

That clearly states there was no evidence against the McCanns, hence the presumption of innocence is valid.