Author Topic: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?  (Read 54649 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jassi

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #105 on: February 14, 2017, 12:03:36 PM »
Then there is something wrong with your comprehension of the English Language.  Try reading it slowly.

There is nothing wrong with my comprehension - if you say no comment, you cannot make a mistake.

What is your interpretation?
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline ChloeR

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #106 on: February 14, 2017, 03:56:02 PM »
You cannot really prove innocence. Short of having concrete alibis and such, but in this case even that wouldn't work as noone knows exactly when 'it' happened and what exactly 'it' was.

I feel the only reason the Supreme Courts decision included the part about the McCanns not being cleared was because they have constantly claimed in our press and such that they were indeed 'found innocent'. I have not read the whole case about this but I also feel its possible Duarte used the 'proof of innocence' in her argument against Amaral and as such, it needed to be pointed out that this was untrue.


Offline G-Unit

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #107 on: February 14, 2017, 04:02:17 PM »
You cannot really prove innocence. Short of having concrete alibis and such, but in this case even that wouldn't work as noone knows exactly when 'it' happened and what exactly 'it' was.

I feel the only reason the Supreme Courts decision included the part about the McCanns not being cleared was because they have constantly claimed in our press and such that they were indeed 'found innocent'. I have not read the whole case about this but I also feel its possible Duarte used the 'proof of innocence' in her argument against Amaral and as such, it needed to be pointed out that this was untrue.

Exactly right. The judges replied to Duarte's incorrect claim, that's all.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #108 on: February 14, 2017, 05:25:31 PM »
You cannot really prove innocence. Short of having concrete alibis and such, but in this case even that wouldn't work as noone knows exactly when 'it' happened and what exactly 'it' was.

I feel the only reason the Supreme Courts decision included the part about the McCanns not being cleared was because they have constantly claimed in our press and such that they were indeed 'found innocent'. I have not read the whole case about this but I also feel its possible Duarte used the 'proof of innocence' in her argument against Amaral and as such, it needed to be pointed out that this was untrue.
"Found innocent" really equates to "not found guilty" in Glaswegian I presume.  They tend to speak in a funny dialect up that way!
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #109 on: February 15, 2017, 09:25:10 AM »
"The case was not shelved because prosecutors believed that Kate and Gerry were innocent, but because of a lack of evidence," the statement said.
https://www.publimetro.cl/cl/mundo/2017/02/11/madeleine-mccann-nuevo-informe-judicial-apunta-hacia-padres-maddie.html
I have the tendency to read that as ""The case was not shelved because prosecutors believed that Kate and Gerry were innocent, but because of a lack of evidence against Kate and Gerry'."

Isn't the fact that there is a lack of evidence against the parents a good reason to rule out the parents?  Then to start looking in other directions?  They knew about Smithman couldn't they have looked into that deeper?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline jassi

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #110 on: February 15, 2017, 09:31:18 AM »
"The case was not shelved because prosecutors believed that Kate and Gerry were innocent, but because of a lack of evidence," the statement said.
https://www.publimetro.cl/cl/mundo/2017/02/11/madeleine-mccann-nuevo-informe-judicial-apunta-hacia-padres-maddie.html
I have the tendency to read that as ""The case was not shelved because prosecutors believed that Kate and Gerry were innocent, but because of a lack of evidence against Kate and Gerry'."

Isn't the fact that there is a lack of evidence against the parents a good reason to rule out the parents?  Then to start looking in other directions?  They knew about Smithman couldn't they have looked into that deeper?


That's what OG has been doing - without much success, it would seem, so perhaps they are on the wrong track as well.
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #111 on: February 15, 2017, 09:37:33 AM »
What I can't quite get my head around is that the Book came out in 2008 but it wasn't till 2015  that the McCanns won the first case.  So they suffered the effects for up to 7 years.  How come it took so long for the result?
"On Tuesday, Portugal’s Supreme Court upheld a decision by the Lisbon appeal court to revoke a ruling that Gonçalo Amaral, a former police inspector, pay €500,000 to the parents of Madeleine McCann, the British toddler who
disappeared in the Algarve in 2007.
The Lisbon appeal court last April struck down a 2015 lower court ruling that Amaral should pay the sum to Kate and Gerry McCann for damages caused by the publication of his book: ‘Maddie: the Truth of the Lie’."
http://theportugalnews.com/news/lisbon-supreme-court-rules-in-favour-of-ex-detective-in-mccann-libel-case/40940

So the appeal was in April 2016 and the SC ruling in Feb 2017.  Dragging on.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2017, 09:41:31 AM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #112 on: February 15, 2017, 09:44:50 AM »
What I can't quite get my head around is that the Book came out in 2008 but it wasn't till 2015  that the McCanns won the first case.  So they suffered the effects for up to 7 years.  How come it took so long for the result?
"On Tuesday, Portugal’s Supreme Court upheld a decision by the Lisbon appeal court to revoke a ruling that Gonçalo Amaral, a former police inspector, pay €500,000 to the parents of Madeleine McCann, the British toddler who
disappeared in the Algarve in 2007.
The Lisbon appeal court last April struck down a 2015 lower court ruling that Amaral should pay the sum to Kate and Gerry McCann for damages caused by the publication of his book: ‘Maddie: the Truth of the Lie’."
http://theportugalnews.com/news/lisbon-supreme-court-rules-in-favour-of-ex-detective-in-mccann-libel-case/40940

So the appeal was in April 2017 and the SC ruling in Feb 2017.  Dragging on.

In large part, because Amaral seized every opportunity to delay, obfuscate and obstruct, working his way through innumerable lawyers (whom he sacked) en route to (eventually) coming to court.

The lawyer who (eventually) represented Amaral pleaded with the court to let proceedings be in camera (or secret) (sic) "to protect Madeleine lest Madeleine be alive".

Amaral was allowed to get away with it, and ultimately went on to win an appeal.

Offline Erngath

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #113 on: February 15, 2017, 09:47:28 AM »
"Found innocent" really equates to "not found guilty" in Glaswegian I presume.  They tend to speak in a funny dialect up that way!

Having served on a jury in Scotland the verdict is Not guilty, not found innocent.
We don't all speak like Rab C Nesbitt  8)><(
Deal with the failings of others as gently as with your own.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #114 on: February 15, 2017, 09:52:27 AM »
Having served on a jury in Scotland the verdict is Not guilty, not found innocent.
We don't all speak like Rab C Nesbitt  8)><(
There has been no court case so it is a bit different.  But thanks, for my comment was a joke really, for we had discussed that the word "jemmied" meant "forced" in Glaswegian.
So what did Gerry mean when they were cleared?
« Last Edit: February 15, 2017, 09:59:19 AM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #115 on: February 15, 2017, 09:55:54 AM »
Having served on a jury in Scotland the verdict is Not guilty, not found innocent.
We don't all speak like Rab C Nesbitt  8)><(

I remember reading somewhere that Scottish people speak in a more grammatically correct way than English people.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #116 on: February 15, 2017, 09:58:15 AM »
There has been no court case so it is a bit different.  But thanks, for my comment was a joke really, for we had discussed the the word "jemmied" meant "forced" in Glaswegian.
So what did Gerry mean when they were cleared?

as I have said before the word cleared has no precise legal meaning..

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #117 on: February 15, 2017, 10:02:44 AM »
as I have said before the word cleared has no precise legal meaning..
There are plenty of occasion where a perp was cleared but brought back into the investigation when new information came along.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Erngath

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #118 on: February 15, 2017, 10:03:18 AM »
I remember reading somewhere that Scottish people speak in a more grammatically correct way than English people.

Perhaps in some parts of Scotland that may be correct but incorrect grammar is fairly common.
Inverness apparently is where the purest form of English is spoken in the UK.I'm not too sure if this is still the case.
sorry....off topic.
Deal with the failings of others as gently as with your own.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Were the McCanns innocent in the eyes of the law?
« Reply #119 on: February 15, 2017, 10:08:28 AM »
Perhaps in some parts of Scotland that may be correct but incorrect grammar is fairly common.
Inverness apparently is where the purest form of English is spoken in the UK.I'm not too sure if this is still the case.
sorry....off topic.

I was a Bus Conductress in Glasgow, once upon a time, so I don't have a problem with what they are saying, bad grammar or not.

Sorry,  Off Topic.  But it's how I found out what Jemmied means.