McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!

Richard IV wrote:Not sure where OxfordBloo got this from

""Retired criminal investigation officers ... retain special rights, and as holders of an ID card for recognition of its quality and rights enjoyed [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 31 January]."

 The Retirement Statute [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording, the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, "the retired, and holder right to retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on active employment."


But if legit, it seems GA was still bound under the police retirement law if he continued to receive a pension from them.  

Joss wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:They are not the Judge's opinion but direct quotes from Portuguese laws as passed by their legislature.

Where on the internet are these laws from Portugal stated on any legal websites, apart from what the judge said?
The laws that are in question here are the ones you quote the judge determined that GA was not allowed to state his opinions from the investigation because of his being an ex PJ officer, and sworn to some type of secrecy, so a big no no for him to have written his book. Also that according to what you cite the judge states, that GA accused the McC's of being guilty of certain crimes in the case of their missing child, and should of upheld  that the McC's were innocent until proven guilty. Apart from that i think its all pretty straightforward.
I think i understand the gist of your posts?

Joss wrote:

Richard IV wrote:Not sure where OxfordBloo got this from

""Retired criminal investigation officers ... retain special rights, and as holders of an ID card for recognition of its quality and rights enjoyed [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 31 January]."

 The Retirement Statute [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording, the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, "the retired, and holder right to retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on active employment."


But if legit, it seems GA was still bound under the police retirement law if he continued to receive a pension from them.  

And how then could the higher court have determined he was within his rights to write his book on the investigation and unban it?

OxfordBloo wrote:2/ Called the McCann guilty.

BlueBag wrote:Dear Oxfordbloo,

Where are you getting these perfect translations of Portuguese law from?

And did you come here to convince us that Amaral doesn't have a chance?

BlueBag wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:2/ Called the McCann guilty.

Where?

He gave an opinion that the evidence points to death and concealment of a body.

Which it does.

The published files say the same.

The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:

1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;

2. There was simulation of abduction.

3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.

4. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;

5. The evidence proves the parents' negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.

OxfordBloo wrote:

Joss wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:They are not the Judge's opinion but direct quotes from Portuguese laws as passed by their legislature.

Where on the internet are these laws from Portugal stated on any legal websites, apart from what the judge said?
The laws that are in question here are the ones you quote the judge determined that GA was not allowed to state his opinions from the investigation because of his being an ex PJ officer, and sworn to some type of secrecy, so a big no no for him to have written his book. Also that according to what you cite the judge states, that GA accused the McC's of being guilty of certain crimes in the case of their missing child, and should of upheld  that the McC's were innocent until proven guilty. Apart from that i think its all pretty straightforward.
I think i understand the gist of your posts?

The laws are quoted with their full reference to the Portuguese legal code.

Are you suggesting the judge was incorrect in her references to Portuguese law which could be checked by reference to the Portuguese statutes?

BlueBag wrote:Did Amaral declare the McCanns "guilty"?

From the end of his book:

The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:

1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;

2. There was simulation of abduction.

3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.

4. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;

5. The evidence proves the parents' negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.

Someone is exaggerating.

All this can be found in the public files.

BlueBag wrote:Did Amaral declare the McCanns "guilty"?

From the end of his book:

The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:

1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;

2. There was simulation of abduction.

3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.

4. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;

5. The evidence proves the parents' negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.

Someone is exaggerating.

All this can be found in the public files.

TheTruthWillOut wrote:Has GA officially submitted an appeal yet? If not, how long does he have to apply?

TheTruthWillOut wrote:Has GA officially submitted an appeal yet? If not, how long does he have to apply?

Even so the statements, when admissible, 
(…) are subjects to prior authorisation provided by the national director or the national deputy directors, at risk of disciplinary proceedings, maintaining the eventual criminal liability [art 12-3]. ( 30 ) The duty of reserve is a functional requirement common to magistrates and organs of criminal police. As an example, in the case of the magistrates of the Public Ministry, the ordinary law postulates that this duty will remain after retirement, establishing the article 148-7 of the Statute that retired judges must respect the reserve required by their condition.

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:Did Amaral declare the McCanns "guilty"?

From the end of his book:

The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:

1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;

2. There was simulation of abduction.

3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.

4. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;

5. The evidence proves the parents' negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.

Someone is exaggerating.

All this can be found in the public files.

Which proves the point.

Amaral said that the McCanns were guilty of negligence in the care of children - an offence under Portuguese Law. Not only were they not convicted but the AG stated that there was no evidence that neglect had occurred.

Additionally, saying that the McCanns 'probably' were involved in another criminal offence- concealing a death.

The judgement contains that very list as proof that Amaral did say that the McCanns were not innocent of those criminal offences.

I was about to quote that section from the translation but you have saved me the bother.

BlueBag wrote:Yes Oxfordbloo.. your mission is acomplished.

Anyway...

This was in the judgement regards retirement:

Even so the statements, when admissible, 
(…) are subjects to prior authorisation provided by the national director or the national deputy directors, at risk of disciplinary proceedings, maintaining the eventual criminal liability [art 12-3]. ( 30 ) The duty of reserve is a functional requirement common to magistrates and organs of criminal police. As an example, in the case of the magistrates of the Public Ministry, the ordinary law postulates that this duty will remain after retirement, establishing the article 148-7 of the Statute that retired judges must respect the reserve required by their condition.

Yes retired JUDGES.

I bet she couldn't find anything about retired police officiers.

Edit..

At least anything that removes their right to freedom of expression and opinion.

BlueBag wrote:It's also the judge who is dancing around on a pinhead.

She has found the requirement to reserve in law for retired Judges... and extended that to all public figures in a slight of hand.

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:Yes Oxfordbloo.. your mission is acomplished.

Anyway...

This was in the judgement regards retirement:

Even so the statements, when admissible, 
(…) are subjects to prior authorisation provided by the national director or the national deputy directors, at risk of disciplinary proceedings, maintaining the eventual criminal liability [art 12-3]. ( 30 ) The duty of reserve is a functional requirement common to magistrates and organs of criminal police. As an example, in the case of the magistrates of the Public Ministry, the ordinary law postulates that this duty will remain after retirement, establishing the article 148-7 of the Statute that retired judges must respect the reserve required by their condition.

Yes retired JUDGES.

I bet she couldn't find anything about retired police officiers.

Edit..

At least anything that removes their right to freedom of expression and opinion.

You conveniently overlook the following from the judgement:

""Retired criminal investigation officers ... retain special rights, and as holders of an ID card for recognition of its quality and rights enjoyed [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 31 January]."

 The Retirement Statute [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording, the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, "the retired, and holder right to retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on active employment."

There is even so a "bond to the civil service", which materialises in conserving the titles and the position of the function exercised and the rights and duties that are not dependent on activity status "(emphasis added). The same note concluded that "the retired remains subject to duties of private conduct translated in particular in the abstention of practice of facts integrators of crimes that have a relevant connection with the functions previously carried out and thus affect actually the functioning of the service or in a serious way the dignity and the prestige of the function or of the Administration 

BlueBag wrote:From the judgement regards retired Police officers, she quotes some previous edict:

There is even so a "bond to the civil service", which materialises in conserving the titles and the position of the function exercised and the rights and duties that are not dependent on activity status "(emphasis added). The same note concluded that "the retired remains subject to duties of private conduct translated in particular in the abstention of practice of facts integrators of crimes that have a relevant connection with the functions previously carried out and thus affect actually the functioning of the service or in a serious way the dignity and the prestige of the function or of the Administration 

That is not a removal of freedom of expression or opinion.

It's a duty to not adversely affect the functioning of the service in a serious way or affect prestige/dignity of the Administration.

Amaral hasn't done that.

But the judge has constructed a house of straw against Amaral.

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:It's also the judge who is dancing around on a pinhead.

She has found the requirement to reserve in law for retired Judges... and extended that to all public figures in a slight of hand.

No:

""Retired criminal investigation officers ... retain special rights, and as holders of an ID card for recognition of its quality and rights enjoyed [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 31 January]."

 The Retirement Statute [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording, the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, "the retired, and holder right to retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on active employment."