McCanns claim they can still appeal Supreme Court decision.

[Mr Gray]

Not according to the Portuguese Supreme Court.

This time it is not up to the portuguese courts...article 8 deals with the right to reputation as an aspect to the right to a private life. Amarals claims are clearly defamatory....so the ECHR would make the decision as to who's right...amaral or the mccanns is more important

[slartibartfast]

This time it is not up to the portuguese courts...article 8 deals with the right to reputation as an aspect to the right to a private life. Amarals claims are clearly defamatory....so the ECHR would make the decision as to who's right...amaral or the mccanns is more important

Wrong, the SC is the highest authority.

[stephen25000]

Wrong, the SC is the highest authority.

Exactly Slarti.

The broadcast i saw earlier, in my view, and the comments by the McCann's were designed to give the impression to the public, that they could appeal the case.

They can't.

[jassi]

This time it is not up to the portuguese courts...article 8 deals with the right to reputation as an aspect to the right to a private life. Amarals claims are clearly defamatory....so the ECHR would make the decision as to who's right...amaral or the mccanns is more important

Nowt to do with Amaral any more.

[Mr Gray]

Wrong, the SC is the highest authority.

The ECHR has the authority to find the SC to have  breached  of the mccanns human rights and to pay the mccanns compensation

[Mr Gray]

Nowt to do with Amaral any more.

nothing to do with amaral at all

[stephen25000]

As a reminder.

The McCann's would have to take the state of Portugal to court.

I actually hope they try.

Since it will prove an even bigger humiliation for them.

[slartibartfast]

nothing to do with amaral at all

Nothing to do with the MM case at all.

[G-Unit]

they were denied the presumption of innocence........they may well have been denied the right to a free trial....we will see.....its very premature of posters here saying they have zero chances of success...they mat well ahve a very good case. amaral has clearly libelled them and that will almost certainly another compalint

If you understood the presumption of innocence you would understand that it has no bearing on a civil trial. It is relevant only in criminal matters. The McCanns were never denied the resumption of innocence. It's a fair trial, not a free one and they weren't denied that either. (although it certainly wasn't free)

[Alice Purjorick]

they can rule on the presumption of innocence....and I understand that claims for "libel" are grought under the right to a family and private life...they can therefore rule that the judgement in portugal violated their rights and was therefore unjust



right to a fair hearing is there too

They are brought under Articles 6 & 10.
The McCanns brought the case in Portugal. They were afforded all the opportunities for a fair trial under Portuguese law and to its full extent. Where is the argument apart from the fact it didn't go they way they wanted it to?

[Mr Gray]

If you understood the presumption of innocence you would understand that it has no bearing on a civil trial. It is relevant only in criminal matters. The McCanns were never denied the resumption of innocence. It's a fair trial, not a free one and they weren't denied that either. (although it certainly wasn't free)

I think your interpretation of that may be wrong and i see no point arguing about it...we will see....there is then the question of defamation and from what i have read re article 8 the mccanns have a real case and a real chance of success

[slartibartfast]

They are brought under Articles 6 & 10.
The McCanns brought the case in Portugal. They were afforded all the opportunities for a fair trial under Portuguese law and to its full extent. Where is the argument apart from the fact it didn't go they way they wanted it to?

They would be better off suing their lawyer, from the final reports she didn't put a strong case forward.

[slartibartfast]

What some seem to miss is that the book wasn't about the disappearance but about the investigation.

[Mr Gray]

They are brought under Articles 6 & 10.
The McCanns brought the case in Portugal. They were afforded all the opportunities for a fair trial under Portuguese law and to its full extent. Where is the argument apart from the fact it didn't go they way they wanted it to?

i doubt we ahve enough information re a fair trial ..we will see...but defamation is a reality

[Mr Gray]

What some seem to miss is that the book wasn't about the disappearance but about the investigation.

the book accused the mccanns of being guilty of criminal offences