To assess this evidence, the Court adopts the standard of proof “beyond reasonable doubt”, but adds that such proof may follow from the coexistence of sufficiently strong, clear and concordant inferences

In our judgment these were clear and unqualified admissions of guilt and we entertain no doubt about their reliability.

The judgment further made it clear that the Court of Appeal would have ordered disclosure of any material which might have assisted the defence, without in any way deciding whether or not the material

In that regard it is clear that if M.R. and G.M. had been in prison on 8   November 1989, A. Mastromatteo would not have been murdered by them.

That was simply to clear one matter up; it could have occupied no more than about ten seconds out of a speech lasting 45 minutes or thereabouts, we are told. That complaint is unjustified.

Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, ECHR 2000-VII; McKerr v. the United Kingdom , no. 28883/95, ECHR 2001 III; Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom , no. 24746/94, ECHR 2001 III (extracts); Paul and Audrey Edwards

principle, be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Paul and Audrey Edwards

Moreover, in light of the above considerations, and in particular given the clear and extensive case-law on the topic, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention

In this respect, the Court notes that the applicant was able to put clear entrapment arguments before the domestic courts (see in particular paragraph 28 above).

However, on account of the risk of police incitement entailed by such techniques, their use must be kept within clear limits (see paragraph 55 below). 52.

The statutory language makes it clear that if anyone, including the claimant, appreciates the point, then leave must be obtained.

Edgard PALLIERES, Conseiller M. Gurvan LE QUINQUIS, Conseiller qui en ont délibéré.

It is clear that the jury, the judge and counsel could also hear.

Where it is clear from the outset however that no effective remedy is available to the applicant, the period runs from the date of the acts or measures complained of, or from the date of knowledge of that

the latest from 7 May   2014, the date of the publication of the Court of Cassation’s judgment no. 18821 in the Ercolano case, which was promptly published in all Italian legal journals, it was clear

       On 31 January 1972 the British Prime Minister, Edward Heath, announced an immediate public inquiry under the Tribunals of Inquiries (Evidence) Act 1921.

In this regard, the applicant submitted that: the criminal proceedings failed to produce clear reasons for RS’ acquittal; the relevant test for self-defence in domestic law allowed instances of unlawful

In connection with the incident of 25 July 2005 the applicant argued that the State authorities had failed to prosecute it as a hate crime although it was clear that the act of violence in issue had been

/05) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Russian national, Mr Eduard