So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?

[Robittybob1]

The say-so of pretty much anyone who has read the files (at least objectively).

They weren't looking at the files were they.  It was more whether the reputation of an English family was more important than the opinions (no matter how wrong with hindsight) of a former PJ coordinator.
The Portuguese agenda!

[stephen25000]

The say-so of pretty much anyone who has read the files (at least objectively).

i.e. Mccann supporter.

[stephen25000]

That would be like going to the third umpire up stairs and even they get it wrong.  It has the appearance of considered decision but there is the appearance of political motive behind it IMO.  Was it that important that the Portuguese won the case.

When I and others have mentioned political interference on behalf of the mccanns, Mccann supporters claim it is a conspiracy theory.

[ferryman]

They weren't looking at the files were they.  It was more whether the reputation of an English family was more important than the opinions (no matter how wrong with hindsight) of a former PJ coordinator.
The Portuguese agenda!

That seems to be about the sum.

[stephen25000]

That seems to be about the sum.

What a surprise.

[Robittybob1]

When I and others have mentioned political interference on behalf of the mccanns, Mccann supporters claim it is a conspiracy theory.

So do you agree there could be this political aspect interfering with the investigation and later the court decisions? 
Look at Syria, Russia is blamed for killing babies.  There have been only 460,000 other deaths so far.  The issue is not the deaths but the politics. Some countries will do anything required to win.

[stephen25000]

So do you agree there could be this political aspect interfering with the investigation and later the court decisions? 
Look at Syria, Russia is blamed for killing babies.  There have been only 460,000 other deaths so far.  The issue is not the deaths but the politics. Some countries will do anything required to win.

It is know Rob, that Blair, Brown and their wives were in 'contact' with the McCann's, along with other government Ministers, and of course Mitchell, who worked for the Blair government.


Now provide evidence of Portuguese government interference in this case against the McCann's.



Can you

[Robittybob1]

It is know Rob, that Blair, Brown and their wives were in 'contact' with the McCann's, along with other government Ministers, and of course Mitchell, who worked for the Blair government.


Now provide evidence of Portuguese government interference in this case against the McCann's.



Can you

Doesn't Amaral himself mention it in that interview?  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8007.0

[G-Unit]

That would be like going to the third umpire up stairs and even they get it wrong.  It has the appearance of considered decision but there is the appearance of political motive behind it IMO.  Was it that important that the Portuguese won the case.

The 'Portuguese' as in Amaral, the judges or the whole nation?

No-one won anything. The McCanns made accusations against Amaral but were unable to prove them in court. Unlike the UK newspapers he refused to back off and settle out of court. Perhaps because he knew the law and knew he hadn't done anything wrong?

[Robittybob1]

The 'Portuguese' as in Amaral, the judges or the whole nation?

No-one won anything. The McCanns made accusations against Amaral but were unable to prove them in court. Unlike the UK newspapers he refused to back off and settle out of court. Perhaps because he knew the law and knew he hadn't done anything wrong?

It is all of them resulting in national pride and respect of the police forces.  (Opinion mostly, yet I did see it an article discussing the need for respect of the police but I have no idea where it might be, so I can't give a cite.)

[G-Unit]

It is all of them resulting in national pride and respect of the police forces.  (Opinion mostly, yet I did see it an article discussing the need for respect of the police but I have no idea where it might be, so I can't give a cite.)

If you bothered to read all the court reports the McCann's case was weak from the beginning. When the Appeal Court overturned the injunction banning Amaral's book in 2010 the judges said much the same as the Appeal Court judges in 2016. Blaming the nation of Portugal because the couple had no case is ridiculous imo.

The book at stake in this process - "Maddie - the Truth of the Lie" - which was written by the defendant Dr. Goncalo Amaral, has the main motivation of defending his personal and professional honour, as the author points out right away in the preface and throughout his text.

The contents of the book does not offend any of the applicants' fundamental rights.

The exercise of its writing and publication is included in the constitutional rights that are secured to everyone by the European Convention on Human Rights and by the Portuguese Republic's Constitution, namely in its articles 37º and 38º.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/court_docs.htm

[Robittybob1]

If you bothered to read all the court reports the McCann's case was weak from the beginning. When the Appeal Court overturned the injunction banning Amaral's book in 2010 the judges said much the same as the Appeal Court judges in 2016. Blaming the nation of Portugal because the couple had no case is ridiculous imo.

The book at stake in this process - "Maddie - the Truth of the Lie" - which was written by the defendant Dr. Goncalo Amaral, has the main motivation of defending his personal and professional honour, as the author points out right away in the preface and throughout his text.

The contents of the book does not offend any of the applicants' fundamental rights.

The exercise of its writing and publication is included in the constitutional rights that are secured to everyone by the European Convention on Human Rights and by the Portuguese Republic's Constitution, namely in its articles 37º and 38º.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/court_docs.htm

Personally I wondered why the McCanns worried about the book.  But the first instance Judge found for the McCanns and I agreed with that decision, since then it has been dubious.

[G-Unit]

Personally I wondered why the McCanns worried about the book.  But the first instance Judge found for the McCanns and I agreed with that decision, since then it has been dubious.

Had Amaral not been a retired policeman the Judge in the Court of the first instance would have dismissed the McCann's case then. She argued that as a retired policemen his freedom of expression was more restricted than that of a normal citizen.  The Appeal Court Judges rejected her argument.

[Robittybob1]

Had Amaral not been a retired policeman the Judge in the Court of the first instance would have dismissed the McCann's case then. She argued that as a retired policemen his freedom of expression was more restricted than that of a normal citizen.  The Appeal Court Judges rejected her argument.

I know that but it didn't seem a very sound reason to me.

[G-Unit]

I know that but it didn't seem a very sound reason to me.

What didn't?