Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

by **Jill Havern** 10.09.17 7:56

This deserves a thread of its own.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
portugalresident.com
There are multiple mixed messages as the parents of missing Madeleine McCann are reported to be taking their three-time court defeat in Portugal to the very last point of appeal: the European Court of Human Rights. British tabloids are already presenting the new situation as ‘a given’ - the Mail for example, claims “it is understood that the result of the appeal will not be known for at least four years”. But the truth is that it may not even get accepted.

There are multiple mixed messages as the parents of missing Madeleine McCann are reported to be taking their three-time court defeat in Portugal to the very last point of appeal: the European Court of Human Rights.

British tabloids are already presenting the new situation as ‘a given’ - the Mail for example, claims “it is understood that the result of the appeal will not be known for at least four years”.

But the truth is that it may not even get accepted.

The ECHR website carries no details of the action (believed to have been lodged in July) for the simple reason that it must first be considered to merit this final avenue of legal recourse - an outcome many believe is unlikely.

The reasons for this is that the 75-page judgement the McCann parents are challenging - handed down by Portugal’s highest court - cited tenets set out by the ECHR, not to mention rights enshrined in the Portuguese Constitution.

As a source explained, “the parents have been told three times that the theory published by former PJ police coordinator Gonçalo Amaral did not overstep the bounds of freedom of expression”.

“Maddie: A Verdade da Mentira” (Maddie: The Truth of the Lie) is back on sale and has purportedly been published and translated in France, the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Spain and Belgium.

An English translation has been available online for years, and “read by millions” ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]).

But according to the UK Sun - which led with an ‘exclusive’ yesterday on what it is calling “a last ditch appeal” against a “shameless ex police chief” - the reasons for the McCann’s new legal bid lie not simply in the fact that they “are desperately upset at Amaral’s claims”, but also that they are “shattered” that Portugal’s top judges did not accept that they had “successfully proved their innocence”.

This was perhaps the most devastating outcome of the Supreme Court ruling, and one which saw UK tabloids go into overdrive ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]).

In other words, this is no longer a fight against what the Sun terms “the outrageous slurs of the Truth of the Lie”, but a battle now against Portuguese Justice.

As a legal source has commented: "The McCanns have effectively to prove that the Supreme Court made a massive mistake".

It could also be seen as another way of stalling the massively expensive outcome of all these years of painful litigation.

The Sun explains: “So far no money has been paid by either party”.

In January, the Mail suggested that the McCanns “could now face financial ruin as they face paying Gonçalo Amaral huge court costs and could be sued themselves by the former policeman”.

Amaral, meantime, is keeping his counsel.

Marking the 10-years since Madeleine’s disappearance during a family holiday in Praia da Luz, he gave a series of interviews to the Cofina media group in which he repeated his theory, as set out in the ‘Truth of the Lie’, explaining all the reasons for it ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]).

Since then he has kept a low profile.

Meantime, the Metropolitan Police are seeking renewed funding for Operation Grange - the probe that has already cost over £11 million looking for answers in this unparalleled case ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]), while streaming service Netflix is said to be making a new eight-part documentary on Madeleine’s disappearance, interviewing “key figures and investigators”.

Parents Kate and Gerry have “refused to be involved”, writes the Sun - highlighting the word refused in capitals.
The McCann’s reasoning, says the tabloid, is that Grange “is still active” - though a decision on whether or not to extend funding, and therefore keep Grange alive, has yet to be made public.

Ten years and four months on, and the disappearance of Madeleine McCann shows absolutely no sign of disappearing.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **Jill Havern** 10.09.17 7:59

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Daily Mail
Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell told MailOnline: 'I can confirm that Kate and Gerry McCann's Portuguese lawyers lodged an appeal application ...

by sallypelt 10.09.17 9:15

I've just done some basic research on how to apply for a valid application the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)

How to make a valid application:

If you decide to apply to the Court, please ensure that your application complies with Rule 47 of the Rules of Court, which sets out the information and documents that must be provided.
Failure to provide any of the information or documents required by Rule 47 §§ 1 and 2 will result in the complaints not being examined by the Court. It is imperative that all fields in the application form are filled in.

I will try and copy and paste Rule 47 in another post, as I keep losing my text, because it tells me that the post is too big to be accepted.

I haven't gone through Rule 47 at the moment (too early in the morning of such detailed reading) but I will discuss it with my daughter over Sunday lunch, as she's just graduated with...............drum roll.................A FIRST CLASS HONOURS DEGREE IN LAW Mrs

by sallypelt 10.09.17 9:17

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

If this posts successfully, could an admin please try to make it bigger, so it can be read by all who want to read it?

Thank you!

by plebgate 10.09.17 9:19

Well done Natasha with these articles in the Portugalresident the UK media know they are being watched and reported on in Portugal and therefore online.
Not so easy to get people to believe all they say now.
Well done clapping

by plebgate 10.09.17 9:21

sallypelt wrote:I've just done some basic research on how to apply for a valid application the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)

How to make a valid application:

If you decide to apply to the Court, please ensure that your application complies with Rule 47 of the Rules of Court, which sets out the information and documents that must be provided.
Failure to provide any of the information or documents required by Rule 47 §§ 1 and 2 will result in the complaints not being examined by the Court. It is imperative that all fields in the application form are filled in.

I will try and copy and paste Rule 47 in another post, as I keep losing my text, because it tells me that the post is too big to be accepted.

I haven't gone through Rule 47 at the moment (too early in the morning of such detailed reading) but I will discuss it with my daughter over Sunday lunch, as she's just graduated with...............drum roll.................A FIRST CLASS HONOURS DEGREE IN LAW

Thank you SallyP and congratulations to your daughter. A very proud mum for sure. smilie

by **Jill Havern** 10.09.17 9:23

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by sallypelt 10.09.17 9:26

Get'emGonçalo wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thank you GGG. I should have posted the link to Rule 47 DUH!

So here it is: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. There are two pages, not one, as I posted earlier.

by sallypelt 10.09.17 9:29

plebgate wrote:Well done Natasha with these articles in the Portugalresident the UK media know they are being watched and reported on in Portugal and therefore online.
Not so easy to get people to believe all they say now.
Well done

Thank you, Plebgate. She had her results back in July, but I tried to keep a dignified silence, but as you say, I am extremely proud of her and my pride has gotten the better of me, and she did work extremely hard, so I think I am justified in a few moments of bragging rights grouphug

by nglfi 10.09.17 10:34

It would be interesting to see what 'alleged violations of the convention' the McCanns believe the Portuguese Supreme court has committed.

by **Jill Havern** 10.09.17 13:14

nglfi wrote:It would be interesting to see what 'alleged violations of the convention' the McCanns believe the Portuguese Supreme court has committed.

The flagrant violation of the Convention that everything the McCanns say and do is true and perfect and lovely and furry and cuddly -
and that everything anyone else does is wrong and beastly and cruel and hurtful and libellous and tastes of sardines.

by MayMuse 10.09.17 13:27

It's all a bit "fishy"

by willowthewisp 10.09.17 15:02

MayMuse wrote:It's all a bit "fishy"

Basically,the McCann's cannot bear the thought that people may have a perception,that something isn't right about Madeleine's disappearance and that they were not involved in what has happened?
Their child Madeleine,has disappeared whilst being left alone in apartment 5a,with her younger siblings,3 May 2007 as stated by the parents of Madeleine(Kate,Gerry) and the Tapas 7/9 who had checked the Apartment for the children's safety,every 30 minutes,but Madeleine had been Abducted or escaped out of the apartment,via the Now Unlocked Patio Doors 22.00hrs 3 May 2007?
It is their Word against what can be proved in a Court of Law of what is most likely to have happened to Madeleine McCann,with regard to times and dates as above?
This is the reason why they have had to employ a"Mouthpiece" Clarence Mitchell,(he lies with as many teeth he has in his head)Justine McGuinness,Carter Ruck,Isabel Duarte for the past Ten Years to purport their version of events as facts,listen carefully to when Gerry makes his statements and his wishes with regard to Evidence,after his family had E-fits in their possession for Five years,but chose Never to release them,trying to find out what had happened to your Daughter,Madeleine,by suppressing efits,that they had paid to be produced,Dave Edgar,Alistair Cowley,Alphaig?

by **Jill Havern** 14.09.17 9:25

Get'emGonçalo wrote:This deserves a thread of its own.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
portugalresident.com
There are multiple mixed messages as the parents of missing Madeleine McCann are reported to be taking their three-time court defeat in Portugal to the very last point of appeal: the European Court of Human Rights. British tabloids are already presenting the new situation as ‘a given’ - the Mail for example, claims “it is understood that the result of the appeal will not be known for at least four years”. But the truth is that it may not even get accepted.

Comments from Natasha's article:

[*]PA • [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
unbelievable ›

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] • [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
These two should have been in jail a long time ago. This battle is all about themselves not about that poor child. They are the worst maggots on the face of the earth.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] • [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It's a shame that the Portuguese law wasn't upheld on the very first hour (in Código Civil - "(...)o dever de vigilância é uma das responsabilidades parentais(...)", and the parents weren't immediately arrested for leaving 3 children alone in an apartment, the eldest 3 years old, whilst they chose to go to an social (however far it was, they weren't in the apartment with the children) - this also lets me know the kind of parents they are. And I'm not even touching their culpability or not in the case for the poor girl disappearing as I obviously can't.
As for the Sun and the Daily Mail, well they're not exactly known for an unbiased approach to journalism are they? It's abhorrently obvious it's not their style.
Portugal is an independent Country, much older than the UK, with it's own rules and laws, that in no way need to match the UK ones. It's simple really; for example, if I'm in England I cannot by law open a supermarket with over 280m2 for more than 6 consecutive hours on a Sunday, whilst unlike in England, in Portugal you cannot by law leave a child unattended, or even leave the Country with a child without both parents permitting, etc etc
There has been enough wasting of money and resources on this attempt by the parents to prove their version against another that was published, as if that's what is most important, instead of using that very same money to find the child, or the truth of what exactly happened(?). Why put so much effort on just proving a point? Wouldn't it be more logical to prove that very same point with the finding of the truth? Unless...
I'm welcome to come to the UK (for now) so long as I follow the nation's rules and obligations and in the same way everyone is welcome in the Algarve...
- [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
  PM [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] • [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
  One of the main problems is that the PJ didn't believe that the 9 parents HAD left all 8 children unattended for 5 nights in a row. That was their alibi. They just didn't have enough evidence at that stage to prove what had happened. More likely possibilities have emerged in the years since ›

[*]PM • [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
So the McCanns think they know more about Portuguese Constitutional law then the Supreme Court does . . . ? Good luck with that one !

Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

McCanns ECHR

Re: Natasha Donn: Mixed messages as McCanns bid to take three-time court defeat to new appeal

Latest topics