Wandering Off Topic

[Angelo222]

yes rob ...I can,....its stated in the PROVEN facts...

The dogs did alert to the substances they were trained for and that included cadaver odour.

[Mr Gray]

I recall you saying the same thing ahead of the SC decision.  I fear you and the McCanns will be sorely disappointed.

That shows how poor you memeory is....I wont ask for a cite because my memory is very good and I know you are wrong

[Mr Gray]

The dogs did alert to the substances they were trained for and that included cadaver odour.

so is it aproven fact taht the dogs alerted to cadaver...not according to the experts

[Angelo222]

the SC has been corrected before and will be again...portugal is governed by ECHR law...the SC judgements fails on several points imo

For all anyone knows the application has been rejected already.

[faithlilly]

faith seems to think brexit has some bearing on the case...do you

May have.

[Mr Gray]

May have.

in what way...slartis failed to give an answer ...and so have you

[Mr Gray]

For all anyone knows the application has been rejected already.

there is a notification if actions are rejected...as Ive already posted...so on that basis it hasnt been rejected

[Robittybob1]

The dogs did alert to the substances they were trained for and that included cadaver odour.

I would accept "The dogs are trained to alert to cadaver odour and to dried human blood"

[Robittybob1]

The right to free speech in Portugal often very much depends on who is being spoken about.

http://portugalresident.com/over-9000-call-for-an-end-to-%E2%80%9Ccrimes-against-honour%E2%80%9D

PORTUGALPRESS on August 02, 2018

A petition calling for the end of crimes against honour has been delivered to parliament signed by 9,000 people.

The hope is that Portugal’s “obsolete and medieval” legislation that has been known to ruin lives is finally consigned to the wastebin.

In the words of the petition’s champion Luís Júdice “these rules simply serve to intimidate whomever has an opinion different to that of the system”.

Portugal’s defamation legislation is “considered obsolete and medieval by the European Commission”, he told Público, adding that sending people to prison for it “simply doesn’t make sense.

As a subscriber to the European Convention for Human Rights, Portugal should “kill this issue at its source”, he said, but that is not what is happening.

Only two years ago, “intellectual and artist” Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues was condemned to three years in jail - which she is still serving, purportedly in a cell with two convicted murderers (click here) - for a long-running battle she waged against high-ranking figures in Portugal’s establishment.

As Júdice said at the time, Rodrigues is “not a criminal”.

If people - no matter what position they have in life - feel their honour has been offended, they can take the issue to the civil courts and ask for compensation, he stressed.

This is the second attempt instigated by Júdice to change a law that to a large extent even conditions Portuguese media.
Newspapers are frequently threatened with ‘an action for defamation’ just for printing the truth. Often the threats are empty, but the mere fact that they are made can lead to editors and/ or publishers to spiking perfectly valid material.

Thus this bid is being keenly watched.

Júdice's first attempt, again in the form of a well-signed petition, failed to be admitted for debate due to the fact that it called on parliament to intervene in the specific case of Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues, which was seen as a violation of the principle of separation of powers.

This new bid is much more generic.

It calls principally for an end of crimes against honour but it also “requests the revocation of the Civil Procedure Code” which prohibits “the written or oral use of unnecessary or unjustified expressions which are offensive to the honour or the good name of another, or in respect of institutions”.

The petition further calls for a parliamentary inquiry into the training of judges, and an overview of judicial decisions that have shown themselves to be incompatible with the Convention of Human Rights.

This last point could well involve the controversial recent judgement that ruled in favour of two men who kidnapped a woman and beat her with a nail-spiked club (click here) on the basis that she was an adulteress who, in other countries in the world, could be executed for her behaviour.

Very interesting.  That kept my interest the full length of the article.

[Mr Gray]

Very interesting.  That kept my interest the full length of the article.

The article by misty shows just ho badlly portuguese Judges misunderstand their duties re defamation re ECHR law...and that is why ..imo...the mccanns have a rock solid case

[Alice Purjorick]

The right to free speech in Portugal often very much depends on who is being spoken about.

http://portugalresident.com/over-9000-call-for-an-end-to-%E2%80%9Ccrimes-against-honour%E2%80%9D

PORTUGALPRESS on August 02, 2018

A petition calling for the end of crimes against honour has been delivered to parliament signed by 9,000 people.

The hope is that Portugal’s “obsolete and medieval” legislation that has been known to ruin lives is finally consigned to the wastebin.

In the words of the petition’s champion Luís Júdice “these rules simply serve to intimidate whomever has an opinion different to that of the system”.

Portugal’s defamation legislation is “considered obsolete and medieval by the European Commission”, he told Público, adding that sending people to prison for it “simply doesn’t make sense.

As a subscriber to the European Convention for Human Rights, Portugal should “kill this issue at its source”, he said, but that is not what is happening.

Only two years ago, “intellectual and artist” Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues was condemned to three years in jail - which she is still serving, purportedly in a cell with two convicted murderers (click here) - for a long-running battle she waged against high-ranking figures in Portugal’s establishment.

As Júdice said at the time, Rodrigues is “not a criminal”.

If people - no matter what position they have in life - feel their honour has been offended, they can take the issue to the civil courts and ask for compensation, he stressed.

This is the second attempt instigated by Júdice to change a law that to a large extent even conditions Portuguese media.
Newspapers are frequently threatened with ‘an action for defamation’ just for printing the truth. Often the threats are empty, but the mere fact that they are made can lead to editors and/ or publishers to spiking perfectly valid material.

Thus this bid is being keenly watched.

Júdice's first attempt, again in the form of a well-signed petition, failed to be admitted for debate due to the fact that it called on parliament to intervene in the specific case of Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues, which was seen as a violation of the principle of separation of powers.

This new bid is much more generic.

It calls principally for an end of crimes against honour but it also “requests the revocation of the Civil Procedure Code” which prohibits “the written or oral use of unnecessary or unjustified expressions which are offensive to the honour or the good name of another, or in respect of institutions”.

The petition further calls for a parliamentary inquiry into the training of judges, and an overview of judicial decisions that have shown themselves to be incompatible with the Convention of Human Rights.

This last point could well involve the controversial recent judgement that ruled in favour of two men who kidnapped a woman and beat her with a nail-spiked club (click here) on the basis that she was an adulteress who, in other countries in the world, could be executed for her behaviour.

The problem is I guess that Portuguese Law is based on the Germanic system which remains much the same without attracting too much attention. I wonder why?

The law of Libel and Slander is governed by Sections 185 upto 200 of the German Criminal Code
Sanctions involve imprisonment ranging from three (3) months to five (5) years, plus a fine.

Mods please note I posted cites for this earlier in the week and do not propose to do it again. Delete the post if you wish it makes it none the less true.....

[Vertigo Swirl]

As if we needed any more proof of the bizarre workings of the Portuguese legal system - you might be forgiven for thinking this happened in Afghanistan not somewhere in Europe!

“This last point could well involve the controversial recent judgement that ruled in favour of two men who kidnapped a woman and beat her with a nail-spiked club (click here) on the basis that she was an adulteress who, in other countries in the world, could be executed for her behaviour”.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Two appeal court judges are in the spotlight this week for apparently condoning domestic violence when the victim is ‘an adulterous female’.

Quoting passages from the Bible, and citing cultures where adulterous women are stoned to death, judges Neto de Moura and Maria Luísa Abrantes ruled that “the adultery of a woman is a very serious attack on the honour and dignity of (her) man”.

Over 20 pages, the duo ‘demolished’ the woman who in 2014 cheated on her husband and then ended up physically assaulted by him after being held to account, against her will, by her former lover, reports Jornal de Notícias.

A lower court had previously heard the case and handed both men suspended jail terms. The Public Ministry appealed however, hoping for custodial sentences.

These will now not be forthcoming.

Indeed, the Porto appeal court duo stressed that “in the Bible, we can read that an adulterous woman should be punished with death”.

It’s a judgement that has sparked outrage over social media - many commentators complaining that it takes the whole issue of gender equality back to the Dark Ages.

The judges’ feeling however was that the lower court had appreciated all the details “well”, particularly in the context that the husband was acting while suffering from depression.

In other words, the judgement ‘sticks’, the aggressors walk free - albeit saddled with their initial fines and suspended jail terms - and any woman committing adultery within an established relationship and coming a cropper will now be painfully aware that judges may not be totally on her side.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

[Angelo222]

That shows how poor you memeory is....I wont ask for a cite because my memory is very good and I know you are wrong

You claimed they would win the libel case, you were right.  You claimed they would win the subsequent appeal by Amaral, you were wrong.  You claimed they would win the Supreme Court appeal launched by the parents, you were wrong.  You claimed the SC decision would be set aside on review, you were wrong. You now claim that the parents will win a ECHR review of the case, in my opinion you will again be wrong.

[Angelo222]

there is a notification if actions are rejected...as Ive already posted...so on that basis it hasnt been rejected

Always assuming it was accepted as being valid in the first place.  The court has made no reference to the case and so much time has now passed that I suspect it was never accepted or was withdrawn.