Madeleine McCann's parents lose libel case with the European Court of Human Rights

[Wonderfulspam]

Had they been illiterate Portuguese peasants they would be doing time yet.  The fact that they are innocent would not have provided any protection for them.

I think it is well past time that Madeleine be given her day and police investigations be allowed to proceed in whichever direction the evidence leads.
As we have seen - never at any time did it veer towards her parents except when the shattering error of the dogs was engineered to that end.

But how would you actually know this though?

Do you think it likely the MET would be announcing that they suspect the McCanns?

I mean, that tactic hasn't got Wolters anywhere has it.

[The General]

I'm still coming to terms with the concept of facts that are untrue.   

Forever hoisted by Davel Gray's petard of remedial, irredeemably erroneous interpretation of law.
Funny how cognitive dissonance makes fools of the naive and trusting in search of a comfort blanket.

[Mr Gray]

Forever hoisted by Davel Gray's petard of remedial, irredeemably erroneous interpretation of law.
Funny how cognitive dissonance makes fools of the naive and trusting in search of a comfort blanket.

Fur coat and no knickers sums up your post and shows your ignorance of portugues justice.
I'll admit I don't understand and the fact is no one has explained.
How can something easily proven false be accepted as a proven fact.

Same in the Cipriano case.. Proven fact...Blood from. Joanna found in the fridge.

Truth is the blood was never dna tested and may well have been animal.
One fact is Amaral's so called facts... Were lies. Are the PJ thick or just dishonest

[faithlilly]

Had they been illiterate Portuguese peasants they would be doing time yet.  The fact that they are innocent would not have provided any protection for them.

I think it is well past time that Madeleine be given her day and police investigations be allowed to proceed in whichever direction the evidence leads.
As we have seen - never at any time did it veer towards her parents except when the shattering error of the dogs was engineered to that end.

“ British police helped to "develop evidence" against Madeleine McCann's parents as they were investigated by Portuguese police as formal suspects in the disappearance of their daughter, the US ambassador to Portugal was told by his British counterpart in September 2007.

The meeting between US ambassador Al Hoffman and the British ambassador, Alexander Wykeham Ellis, took place a fortnight after Kate and Gerry McCann were formally declared arguidos, or suspects, by Portuguese police. The McCanns have said that there was "absolutely no evidence to implicate them in Madeleine's disappearance whatsoever."

In a diplomatic cable marked confidential, the US ambassador reported: "Without delving into the details of the case, Ellis admitted that the British police had developed the current evidence against the McCann parents, and he stressed that authorities from both countries were working co-operatively."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/dec/13/wikileaks-madeleine-mccann-british-police

[Vertigo Swirl]

“ British police helped to "develop evidence" against Madeleine McCann's parents as they were investigated by Portuguese police as formal suspects in the disappearance of their daughter, the US ambassador to Portugal was told by his British counterpart in September 2007.

The meeting between US ambassador Al Hoffman and the British ambassador, Alexander Wykeham Ellis, took place a fortnight after Kate and Gerry McCann were formally declared arguidos, or suspects, by Portuguese police. The McCanns have said that there was "absolutely no evidence to implicate them in Madeleine's disappearance whatsoever."

In a diplomatic cable marked confidential, the US ambassador reported: "Without delving into the details of the case, Ellis admitted that the British police had developed the current evidence against the McCann parents, and he stressed that authorities from both countries were working co-operatively."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/dec/13/wikileaks-madeleine-mccann-british-police

I thought the British High Ups were brought in to protect the McCanns and help them get off, isn’t that what The Gonc alleged and why he got fired?

[Eleanor]

All going well then.

[barrier]

All going well then.

It is, given the thread is about the ECHR case.

[Wonderfulspam]

All going well then.

No, of course not.
The abductor(s) still haven't been brought to justice & he, she or they, could strike again.

[barrier]

Some where I read. 

you really need to listen to someone who knows what they are talking about..thats me. i probably know more about the court and ECHR case than anyone else on any forum...including poulton...brown...the P resident......eevry one of them.

first the SC did not rule on whether the book was libellous....and the SC did noy say the mcCanns havent been proved innocece...yhey simply gave their opinion on the balance of rights re article 8 and 10....and they got it wrong and i can tell you why.

this case is all about amaral rights under articla 10 and the McCanns rights under article 8.
If you look at how the ECHR decide one of the major points is the veraciity of the claims ...in this case those made by amaral

The portuguese court made a mistake...even the court of the first instance...they said they were not there to consider the veracity of amarals claims..they would not let Gerry present his arguments re the dogs which would have shown amarals claims were not based on facts.....but on lies...thats contrary to the ECHRs stance...major error by portugal.

the mcCanns have quoted Springer vs Germnay where the ECHR ruked in favour of free speech...peter mac...who must be a bit thick on  the CMOMM site says he cant understand why the Mcs have cited a case where Free speech was ruled more important....i understand...it sbecause the claims were true and proved in court.


so the ECHR will look at the evidence and see whether amaral was right to pronounce the mccanns guilty...the dogs etc...they will look at that and may even give their opinions on them.   the archiving despatch said none of the evidence used to make the mccans guilty was confirmed..its in the files. so amaral is nmaking claims with no evidence to support them.

Based on all this I cannot see any way the ECHR will not find in the McCanns favour

[faithlilly]

I thought the British High Ups were brought in to protect the McCanns and help them get off, isn’t that what The Gonc alleged and why he got fired?

Then he was obviously wrong.

[Wonderfulspam]

Then he was obviously wrong.

Just like he was wrong about the McCanns. Wolters can prove it.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Then he was obviously wrong.

and he’s wrong about the McCanns still being suspects.  He is a paranoid conspiracy theorist isn’t he?

[G-Unit]

Some where I read. 

you really need to listen to someone who knows what they are talking about..thats me. i probably know more about the court and ECHR case than anyone else on any forum...including poulton...brown...the P resident......eevry one of them.

first the SC did not rule on whether the book was libellous....and the SC did noy say the mcCanns havent been proved innocece...yhey simply gave their opinion on the balance of rights re article 8 and 10....and they got it wrong and i can tell you why.

this case is all about amaral rights under articla 10 and the McCanns rights under article 8.
If you look at how the ECHR decide one of the major points is the veraciity of the claims ...in this case those made by amaral

The portuguese court made a mistake...even the court of the first instance...they said they were not there to consider the veracity of amarals claims..they would not let Gerry present his arguments re the dogs which would have shown amarals claims were not based on facts.....but on lies...thats contrary to the ECHRs stance...major error by portugal.

the mcCanns have quoted Springer vs Germnay where the ECHR ruked in favour of free speech...peter mac...who must be a bit thick on  the CMOMM site says he cant understand why the Mcs have cited a case where Free speech was ruled more important....i understand...it sbecause the claims were true and proved in court.


so the ECHR will look at the evidence and see whether amaral was right to pronounce the mccanns guilty...the dogs etc...they will look at that and may even give their opinions on them.   the archiving despatch said none of the evidence used to make the mccans guilty was confirmed..its in the files. so amaral is nmaking claims with no evidence to support them.

Based on all this I cannot see any way the ECHR will not find in the McCanns favour

My post from October 2018;

He used facts from the investigation. No-one knows if those facts are true or false. In order for the ECHR to decide they would have to investigate the case themselves and then use their own findings.

That isn't within their remit
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7275.msg497499;topicseen#msg497499

[Wonderfulspam]

and he’s wrong about the McCanns still being suspects.  He is a paranoid conspiracy theorist isn’t he?

How could you possibly know for sure?

[faithlilly]

and he’s wrong about the McCanns still being suspects.  He is a paranoid conspiracy theorist isn’t he?

I have no idea. He still has connections within the PJ so who knows. What we must never forget is the Portuguese still have primacy in this case no matters what Wolter says.