COURT BATTLE Madeleine McCann’s parents to find out this year if they’ve won legal battle against ex-cop

by Guest 31.05.21 1:36

Geeeezus, saints preserve us - Nick the Pisa is on the myth again...

COURT BATTLE Madeleine McCann’s parents to find out this year if they’ve won legal battle against ex-cop

Nick Pisa
23:30, 30 May 2021Updated: 23:32, 30 May 2021

MADELEINE McCann's parents have been told they will find out this year if they have won their legal battle against ex-cop Goncalo Amaral.

Kate and Gerry took action against Amaral, 61, for his slurs in book The Truth of the Lie.

He claimed the devastated couple were responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance in 2007.

The pair initially took the case to court in Portugal and won, but then lost an appeal.

They lodged a fresh case at the European Court of Human Rights in 2017.

ECHR judges wrote to the Portuguese government and the McCanns asking for “observations” and if they would consider settling out of court.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15116470/madeleine-mccann-parents-legal-battle-cop/

angry2

by **PeterMac** 31.05.21 7:16

MADELEINE McCann's parents have been told they will find out this year if they have won their legal battle against ex-cop Goncalo Amaral.

How many mistakes and lies can be included in one sentence in The Sun. ?
1 They haven't.
2. It is expected to be in the first legal term of 2022
3 Their legal battle is NOT against Gonçalo Amaral. It is against the State of Portugal

by **sharonl** 31.05.21 23:14

PeterMac wrote:MADELEINE McCann's parents have been told they will find out this year if they have won their legal battle against ex-cop Goncalo Amaral.

How many mistakes and lies can be included in one sentence in The Sun. ?
1 They haven't.
2. It is expected to be in the first legal term of 2022
3 Their legal battle is NOT against Gonçalo Amaral. It is against the State of Portugal

The Sun seems to have got that off to a fine art.

1. Madeleine disappeared
2. from her bed
3. on May 3rd 2007
4. whilst her parents dined at the local tapas
5. Just yards away from their apartment

by garfy 07.06.21 11:37

PeterMac wrote:MADELEINE McCann's parents have been told they will find out this year if they have won their legal battle against ex-cop Goncalo Amaral.

How many mistakes and lies can be included in one sentence in The Sun. ?
1 They haven't.
2. It is expected to be in the first legal term of 2022
3 Their legal battle is NOT against Gonçalo Amaral. It is against the State of Portugal

This seems to involve Goncalo Amaral, wonder what thought are on this.

Mccann case against Portugal.

Communicated on January 14, 2021

Posted on February 1, 2021

FOURTH SECTION

Application no.57195 / 17
Gerald Patrick MCCANN and Kate Marie HEALY
against Portugal
lodged on July 28, 2017

SUBJECT OF THE CASE

The request concerns allegations made by GA, a former inspector of the judicial police, in a book and a documentary broadcast on the television channel T., then put on sale in the form of a DVD, about the involvement of the applicants in the disappearance of their daughter, which occurred on 3 May 2007 in the south of Portugal. It also concerns the civil liability action brought by the applicants against GA, its publisher and the T. television channel, after which they were dismissed.

Relying on Articles 6 §§ 1 and 2, 8 and 10 § 2 of the Convention, the applicants assert that the allegations made by GA in the book and the documentary in question infringed their right to respect for their private life and their right to the presumption of innocence. They complain that the domestic courts failed to weigh the interests at stake in accordance with the criteria set out in the Court's case-law.

Furthermore, still from the point of view of Articles 6 §§ 1 and 2, 8 and 10 § 2 of the Convention, they argue that the reasoning contained in the decisions delivered on 31 January and 21 March 2017 by the Supreme Court in the outcome of the civil liability action also violated their right to the presumption of innocence.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Was there an infringement of the applicants' right to respect for their private life, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention (see, Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. , § 83, 7 February 2012; and Larrañaga Arando and Others v. Spain (dec.), Nos 73911/16, 233/17 3086/17 and 5155/17, § 42, 25 June 2019) in particular with regard to the allegations made by GA in the litigious book and documentary?

In particular, did the respondent State comply with its positive obligations aimed at guaranteeing the applicants the right to respect for their “private life”, within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention?

Furthermore, in their decisions, did the domestic courts carry out an adequate balance, in accordance with the criteria established by the Court's case-law, between the applicants' right to respect for their private life and the right of the parties? opponents of freedom of expression(see, Von Hannover (no 2) [GC], nos 40660/08 and 60641/08, §§ 108-113, ECHR 2012, Axel Springer AG, cited above, §§ 89-95, and Bédat v. Switzerland [GC], no 56925/08, §§ 52-54, ECHR 2016)?

2. Has the presumption of innocence guaranteed by Article 6 § 2 of the Convention been respected in the present case having regard to the reasoning contained in the decisions delivered on 31 January and 21 March 2017 by the Supreme Court (see, Allen v. The United Kingdom [GC], no 25424/09, § 94, ECHR 2013)?

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:pzfiYKKRNd0J:https://www.doctrine.fr/d/CEDH/HFCOM/COMMUNICATEDCASES/2021/CEDH001-207898+&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

by **PeterMac** 07.06.21 12:17

This seems to involve Goncalo Amaral, wonder what thought are on this.

He is named, because it was his book which started it all off.
But the case against him personally has been fought, and lost.
Then lost again, and then lost a third time
They are not complaining about the rules of the game.

And as I posted upthread the cases they are relying on were in several cases quoted as precedents by the Supreme Court In Portugal.
So how they think they help their case is a mystery

Larrañaga v Spain was thrown out before a hearing and is therefore NOT a precedent which can be used in a legal argument
Axel Springer ruled in favour of freedom of publication
Von Hannover also ruled in favour of publication on the grounds that von Hannover (Royal family of Monaco) seek publicity, and therefore cannot suddenly complain about Press intrusion (Like the McCanns ? ? ? ?)
Bedat lost on a technicality and had to pay €40
Allen, the UK case, is an important one. She was found guilty, imprisoned, and then the verdict was annulled when new evidence came to light. The DPP decided not to enter another prosecution because she had already done some prison time, and it was simply not worth it. She claimed compensation, claiming the lack of prosecution proved her INNOCENCE. The ECHR held it did not.
The Supreme Court went through this case (Allen) in detail, and showed how it related to the McCanns, then went on to say that the shelving of the case did NOT indicate their innocence. Only that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute, which is not the same thing.

COURT BATTLE Madeleine McCann’s parents to find out this year if they’ve won legal battle against ex-cop

COURT BATTLE Madeleine McCann’s parents to find out this year if they’ve won legal battle against ex-cop

Re: COURT BATTLE Madeleine McCann’s parents to find out this year if they’ve won legal battle against ex-cop

Re: COURT BATTLE Madeleine McCann’s parents to find out this year if they’ve won legal battle against ex-cop

Re: COURT BATTLE Madeleine McCann’s parents to find out this year if they’ve won legal battle against ex-cop

Re: COURT BATTLE Madeleine McCann’s parents to find out this year if they’ve won legal battle against ex-cop

Latest topics