Author Topic: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?  (Read 98748 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #525 on: April 10, 2017, 02:33:16 PM »
So the source is parapono who told us this morning that hiding and disposing a cadaver is not a crime in Portugal
No pm
I'm happy that this is unconfirmed
Why do you feel the need to twist things to 'win' a point?  At no time did I say or imply where G-Unit's information came from.  I don't know.  I made it abundantly clear I don't care.

If you have to resort to such distortion you have lost the argument.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 03:08:41 PM by John »
What's up, old man?

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #526 on: April 10, 2017, 02:37:40 PM »
Why do you feel the need to twist things to 'win' a point?  At no time did I say or imply where G-Unit's information came from.  I don't know.  I made it abundantly clear I don't care.

If you have to resort to such distortion you have lost the plot.
"It is my understanding that Parapono has followed the McCanns v Amaral case and is informed as to how the court will allocate costs". 

Offline Mr Gray

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #527 on: April 10, 2017, 02:55:31 PM »
Why do you feel the need to twist things to 'win' a point?  At no time did I say or imply where G-Unit's information came from.  I don't know.  I made it abundantly clear I don't care.

If you have to resort to such distortion you have lost the plot.
you posted....

"It is my understanding that Parapono has followed the McCanns v Amaral case and is informed as to how the court will allocate costs".

with you making such a glaring error its probably best not to accuse others of losing the plot....

Offline parapono

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #528 on: April 10, 2017, 02:55:41 PM »
I'm pretty sure that the "concealment of a cadaver" is a crime in Portugal, as it is in most countries. There was a recent case, here in Portugal, of a German lady who buried her husband on their property after he died of natural causes. Needless to say, she was arrested.
Artigo 254° of the Penal Code
Profanação de cadáver ou de lugar fúnebre
1 - Quem:
a) Sem autorização de quem de direito, subtrair, destruir ou ocultar cadáver ou parte dele, ou cinzas
de pessoa falecida;
b) Profanar cadáver ou parte dele, ou cinzas de pessoa falecida, praticando actos ofensivos do
respeito devido aos mortos; ou
c) Profanar lugar onde repousa pessoa falecida ou monumento aí erigido em sua memória, praticando
actos ofensivos do respeito devido aos mortos;
é punido com pena de prisão até 2 anos ou com pena de multa até 240 dias.
2 - A tentativa é punível.

It’s not a crime but a misdemeanor, an offence, and obviously circumstances are taken in consideration before applying the sanction. One thing is to conceal a cadaver to hide a death, another is to conceal a cadaver to keep it close to you. The sanction is either prison up to 2 years in case the concealer doesn’t pay the fine, that can be X by 240 days.


Offline Mr Gray

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #529 on: April 10, 2017, 02:56:05 PM »
Why do you feel the need to twist things to 'win' a point?  At no time did I say or imply where G-Unit's information came from.  I don't know.  I made it abundantly clear I don't care.

If you have to resort to such distortion you have lost the plot.

ad hom...reported

Offline Mr Gray

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #530 on: April 10, 2017, 02:57:45 PM »
Artigo 254° of the Penal Code
Profanação de cadáver ou de lugar fúnebre
1 - Quem:
a) Sem autorização de quem de direito, subtrair, destruir ou ocultar cadáver ou parte dele, ou cinzas
de pessoa falecida;
b) Profanar cadáver ou parte dele, ou cinzas de pessoa falecida, praticando actos ofensivos do
respeito devido aos mortos; ou
c) Profanar lugar onde repousa pessoa falecida ou monumento aí erigido em sua memória, praticando
actos ofensivos do respeito devido aos mortos;
é punido com pena de prisão até 2 anos ou com pena de multa até 240 dias.
2 - A tentativa é punível.

It’s not a crime but a misdemeanor, an offence, and obviously circumstances are taken in consideration before applying the sanction. One thing is to conceal a cadaver to hide a death, another is to conceal a cadaver to keep it close to you. The sanction is either prison up to 2 years in case the concealer doesn’t pay the fine, that can be X by 240 days.

could you tell us where you got the information from re court costs in the libel case

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #531 on: April 10, 2017, 03:04:02 PM »
you posted....

"It is my understanding that Parapono has followed the McCanns v Amaral case and is informed as to how the court will allocate costs".

with you making such a glaring error its probably best not to accuse others of losing the plot....
You've just twisted what happened yet again in a petty point-scoring exercise.  At no time did I link this to G-Unit - that was your doing.

If you have to repeatedly twist things to 'score' your latest point, you have lost the plot.  On this occasion you are taking one line out of context and trying to make it fit your agenda.  My post does not support your agenda, but I'm sure you already knew that.
What's up, old man?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #532 on: April 10, 2017, 03:06:37 PM »
You've just twisted what happened yet again in a petty point-scoring exercise.  At no time did I link this to G-Unit - that was your doing.

If you have to repeatedly twist things to 'score' your latest point, you have lost the plot.  On this occasion you are taking one line out of context and trying to make it fit your agenda.  My post does not support your agenda, but I'm sure you already knew that.
Question for gunit...was my post


You replied...
It is my understanding that Parapono has followed the McCanns v Amaral case and is informed as to how the court will allocate costs. 


can you not spot the link to gunit

Offline parapono

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #533 on: April 10, 2017, 03:07:17 PM »
could you tell us where you got the information from re court costs in the libel case

I'm not aware of giving any information on this forum about the court costs to be paid by the McCanns due to them losing their damages case against Gonçalo Amaral cs. I didn't.
Simplest would be to ask the McCanns themselves.

« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 03:23:04 PM by parapono »

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #534 on: April 10, 2017, 03:08:22 PM »
"It is my understanding that Parapono has followed the McCanns v Amaral case and is informed as to how the court will allocate costs".
?

It is my understanding Parapono has followed the court case.

It is my understanding Parapono is informed as to how the court will allocate costs.

Is that simple enough?  Or do you wish try again.
What's up, old man?

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #535 on: April 10, 2017, 03:16:18 PM »
?

It is my understanding Parapono has followed the court case.

It is my understanding Parapono is informed as to how the court will allocate costs.

Is that simple enough?  Or do you wish try again.
On what do you base your understanding regarding Paparono's knowledge of how the court will allocate costs?  He or she doesn't seem to know from what he or she has just posted.

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #536 on: April 10, 2017, 03:19:01 PM »
First things first.  Parapono doesn't seem aware that it wasn't a damages trial, but rather, a libel trial.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #537 on: April 10, 2017, 03:19:23 PM »
?

It is my understanding Parapono has followed the court case.

It is my understanding Parapono is informed as to how the court will allocate costs.

Is that simple enough?  Or do you wish try again.


it seems you are wrong yet again.......parapono has posted she has given no info about court costs

Offline parapono

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #538 on: April 10, 2017, 03:21:26 PM »
On what do you base your understanding regarding Paparono's knowledge of how the court will allocate costs?  He or she doesn't seem to know from what he or she has just posted.
May I correct you once again.
I posted I didn't inform this forum about how the Portuguese Courts allocate costs.
Full stop.


Offline Mr Gray

Re: So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?
« Reply #539 on: April 10, 2017, 03:23:26 PM »
May I correct you once again.
I posted I didn't inform this forum about how the Portuguese Courts allocate costs.
Full stop.


you should correct sil not me....as sil  is making claims on your behalf.....