McCANNS LOSE THEIR APPEAL!! GONCALO WINS 31/01/17 in Supreme Court

The McCanns must be feeling pretty desperate, imo. They appear to have no public support apart from some very obvious shrills. And all the Tapas children are at an age where they will be asking questions, not least the twins.

What is the end game I wonder? How will OG wind up this charade?

poster wrote:The McCanns must be feeling pretty desperate, imo. They appear to have no public support apart from some very obvious shrills. And all the Tapas children are at an age where they will be asking questions, not least the twins.

What is the end game I wonder? How will OG wind up this charade?

Love the typo

Yes they are shrill and they seem to be getting shriller by the day.

Copied from Textusa blog:

http://pjga.blogspot.pt/2017/03/arguicao-de-nulidade-do-acordao.html



Anonymous18 Mar 2017, 20:49:00
PJGA

18 Mar 2017
Arguição de Nulidade do Acórdão

Below is a copy of the McCann's request for annulment of the Supreme Court´s decision, filed by the couple´s lawyer on the 16th of February, 2017. We understand that the filing of this appeal has a suspensive effect on the Supreme Court´s ruling.

The request alleges that the Supreme Court´s decision "lacks a foundation (...) in stating that one cannot invoke the principle of presumption of innocence in order to restrict the right to freedom of expression, because it is based on the erroneous presumption that the archiving of the criminal investigation 'was determined because it was not possible for the Public Ministry to obtain enough indications of the practice of crimes by the appellants'".

In case you are struggling with the legalese (we do), here is what we understand to be the reasoning behind the request:

1. The McCanns have invoked the principle of presumption of innocence to justify the restrictions they want imposed on dr. Amaral's freedom of expression;

2. The Supreme Court stated, in its ruling, that the above is no argument because the McCanns were not considered innocent by the investigation and the case was archived because not enough evidence was found to charge them.

3. The McCanns, because they believe the above argument is false, request for the Supreme Court's decision to be nullified.
http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/

Reply

Thanks Mo for bringing us that... bit complicated, but I cannot imagine the Supreme Court will change their decision somehow.

I doubt they can change their mind because it was determined in 2008. The McCann lawyers should have taken it up with the Public Ministry at that time.

Here's Anne Guedes translation of the McCanns request...


Pamalam-Gerrys Blogs‏ @JustPamalam  · 53m  
 


#McCann ‘s Supreme Court annulment request 16th February, 2017.
Translation by Anne Guedes

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Annulment_request.htm …

I can't see this has already been posted nor sure where it should go, so popping it here. Please move/delete as appropriate


Projecto Justiça Gonçalo Amaral
Arguição de Nulidade do Acórdão
Posted: 18 Mar 2017 11:51 AM PDT
Below is a copy of the McCann's request for annulment of the Supreme Court´s decision, filed by the couple´s lawyer on the 16th of February, 2017. We understand that the filing of this appeal has a suspensive effect on the Supreme Court´s ruling.

The request alleges that the Supreme Court´s decision "lacks a foundation (...) in stating that one cannot invoke the principle of presumption of innocence in order to restrict the right to freedom of expression, because it is based on the erroneous presumption that the archiving of the criminal investigation 'was determined because it was not possible for the Public Ministry to obtain enough indications of the practice of crimes by the appellants'".

In case you are struggling with the legalese (we do), here is what we understand to be the reasoning behind the request:

1. The McCanns have invoked the principle of presumption of innocence to justify the restrictions they want imposed on dr. Amaral's freedom of expression;

2. The Supreme Court stated, in its ruling, that the above is no argument because the McCanns were not considered innocent by the investigation and the case was archived because not enough evidence was found to charge them.

3. The McCanns, because they believe the above argument is false, request for the Supreme Court's decision to be nullified.

What then happens if the SC decision is nullified ?

I cannot see it nullified. It's the Supreme Court's verdict for crying out loud.

ETA they're between a rock and a hard place, also referred to as between the devil and the deep blue sea. Desperate times and desperate actions IMO.

Mo wrote:
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/on-mccanns-request-for-annulment-of.html

Snipped:

that Gonçalo Amaral will have to wait for the decision of the Supreme Court on the request for annulment.

Are we talking days, weeks, months................. years?

Andrew wrote:

Mo wrote:
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/on-mccanns-request-for-annulment-of.html

Snipped:

that Gonçalo Amaral will have to wait for the decision of the Supreme Court on the request for annulment.

Are we talking days, weeks, months................. years?

Judging by past appeals early 2018,those of a nervous disposition look away now,it'll mean OG dragging on.

MCCANNS' LIBEL HELL Maddie McCann’s parents Kate and Gerry owe £29k libel bill to the Portuguese cop who accused them of killing their daughter


The Sun on Sunday has seen court files showing they have had to pay him £24,000 — and now another £5,500


Exclusive


From Gerard Couzens in Lisbon


23rd March 2019, 10:00 pm
Updated: 23rd March 2019, 10:50 pm


MADELEINE McCann’s parents have been hit with £29,500 in legal fees for the Portuguese cop who accused them of killing their child.

Kate and Gerry lost a libel case against ex- detective Goncalo Amaral.

The Sun on Sunday has seen court files showing they have had to pay him £24,000 — and now they are about to be told to cough up another £5,500.

Madeleine vanished aged three from her bed during a family holiday in Praia da Luz, Portugal, in 2007.



In a 2008 book, Amaral claimed Kate and Gerry accidentally killed her and covered it up by pretending she had been abducted.

He overturned their initial damages victory over his book The Truth Of The Lie and the decision in his favour was also upheld by another court.

The extra £5,500 is to cover further costs being run up by his lawyers defending their final appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.

And the couple, both 51, of Rothley, Leics, face having to fork out even more if they lose again.



Our reporter was given permission by staff to view the huge legal dossier kept in an office at Lisbon Civil Court.

The court papers also show Amaral, 59, who has caused the parents fresh distress in a controversial new Netflix documentary, had huge debts when he wrote his book.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8705813/maddie-mccann-kate-gerry-libel-bill-goncalo-amaral/

I wonder if they have actually paid the money though?

It says "they have had to pay" but, knowing what they are like, they wouldn't have done so if there was any way to avoid it.

The legal fees charged By Amaral's team seem very reasonable.

Had the Mccanns won the case, I suspect their legal fees would be triple the figure they now have to pay - though whether they will pay up is problematic - will they ask for the costs to be taxed?

Antonia wrote:The legal fees charged By Amaral's team seem very reasonable.

Had the Mccanns won the case, I suspect their legal fees would be triple the figure they now have to pay - though whether they will pay up is problematic - will they ask for the costs to be taxed?

Seems very reasonable, I would expect a lot more. As you say McCanns fees would be a lot more I would think. So does this come from fund money?

The costs are awarded against the McCanns personally and not against the Fund. Now Gerry has a good job and would be on a decent salary; we don't know that Kate gets as a 'medical worker.' Then maybe those lovely royalties are still coming in! So I don't see why the McCanns would have a difficulty paying them from their own resources.

As the McCanns and family and friends control the Fund ltd company they could use the money there to pay the legal fees if they chose. Strictly they shouldn't as the fund exists to search for madeleine and to bring the culprit(s) to justice.