Leonor Cipriano confessed before the investigating magistrate after her arrest for the murder of her daughter Joana. Up until that night and her appearance before the magistrate she was interrogated for several days but allowed home each evening. A police guard maintained a watching brief over her home each night.
After being committed to custody and the appointment of a new lawyer she changed her stance, pled nit guilty and refused to cooperate with the investigation. She refused to testify during her trial.
The only reason Leonor confessed was because just for a moment, she regretted what she had done.
Leonor Cipriano confessed before the investigating magistrate after her arrest for the murder of her daughter Joana. Up until that night and her appearance before the magistrate she was interrogated for several days but allowed home each evening. A police guard maintained a watching brief over her home each night.
After being committed to custody and the appointment of a new lawyer she changed her stance, pled nit guilty and refused to cooperate with the investigation. She refused to testify during her trial.
The only reason Leonor confessed was because just for a moment, she regretted what she had done.
Ever heard of fear, have you?. Leonor was interrogated almost non stop for nearly two days, and without a Lawyer present. She was returned to the prison covered in bruises. What can have been going on? Making sure she got her vitamins, were they?
Ever heard of fear, have you?. Leonor was interrogated almost non stop for nearly two days, and without a Lawyer present. She was returned to the prison covered in bruises. What can have been going on? Making sure she got her vitamins, were they?
if what you are saying is true...do you have any supporting evidence...then why was she beaten so badly by the pj
You're way off track Eleanor. I'm talking about the first day she was arrested, not weeks later.
Simple...so they could find the little girls body.
Ever heard of fear, have you?. Leonor was interrogated almost non stop for nearly two days, and without a Lawyer present. She was returned to the prison covered in bruises. What can have been going on? Making sure she got her vitamins, were they?
if what you are saying is true...do you have any supporting evidence...then why was she beaten so badly by the pjForgive me if I have got it wrong. Atm, dont have time to check ... but I thought that Leonor was bleeding internally and taken to hospital, days /weeks before she was even properly tortured. The PJ claimed it was menstrual blood. FGS, if that was the case, why did they keep her sitting in it?
This is even more disgusting than first I thought.
No Eleanor, the true disgust is in the murder of a helpless child and the thought that they might have fed her to the pigs. Will you still support Leonor if she eventually tells the truth of what happened to Joana?
No Eleanor, the true disgust is in the murder of a helpless child and the thought that they might have fed her to the pigs. Will you still support Leonor if she eventually tells the truth of what happened to Joana?
I will always support her right not to be tortured...do you john
FGS John
There is absolutely NO PROOF of any of that rubbish. Just the words of lying cop. A criminal to boot.
Thank God you didn't receive similar treatment in your case.
She would have left the police station in a body-bag if I had got my hands on the evil bitch.
She would have left the police station in a body-bag if I had got my hands on the evil bitch.So says an evil bitch, talking about putting her in a body bag ... murder
John, I cannot believe that you honestly think what Amaral did is OK. But I think for some reason it has to do with protecting Amaral ... and it is not about Justice at all.
FGS John
There is absolutely NO PROOF of any of that rubbish. Just the words of lying cop. A criminal to boot.
Thank God you didn't receive similar treatment in your case.
Can you give me an honest answer to this question Sadie.
You are a senior police officer and have a young girl missing on your patch. Her mother initially confesses to having bashed her head against a wall killing her and of asking her brother to hide the body. The woman is then incarcerated in prison and refuses to say where the girl is hidden. She gets a new lawyer and next thing you know she us denying the murder and refusing to cooperate. There us a small chance the girl might still be alive so what do you do?
1. Do you accept what the mother now says and abandon the search.
2. Do you apply pressure to the mother in an attempt to save the child?
Just the utterings of criminal thug João Cipriano. He hid her here, he hid her there, he hid her everywhere.Joao also threatened with violence no doubt. Maybe even had already been beaten a little. Either thta or as he was a drug addict we understand,his drugs were withdrawn ... only to have been given again after his "confession"
Joao also threatened with violence no doubt. Maybe even had already been beaten a little. Either thta or as he was a drug addict we understand,his drugs were withdrawn ... only to have been given again after his "confession"
Think a little deeper John
Now I truly have to go. My life is chaotic atm.
So says an evil bitch, talking about putting her in a body bag ... murder
Gawd strewth, the thought that some of you might become jurors horrifies me.
No Eleanor, the true disgust is in the murder of a helpless child and the thought that they might have fed her to the pigs. Will you still support Leonor if she eventually tells the truth of what happened to Joana?
She doesn't know. Or are you suggesting that she sustained several hours of brutal beating because she didn't want to say? After supposedly confessing to the child's murder, if what you say is true.
Pigs leave bones, even if only small pieces. Did they ever find any of those? I don't think so.
Take a treasured family pet or elderly relative, an industrial mincer or wood chipper & pen full of hungry pigs......
'ta da' no bones.
Ah, I see. Leonor and her brother cleaned up the pig pen and then put the pig shit through a mincer or a wood chipper. Very sensible.
Unbelievably, pigs are very clean animals so their mess is removed regularly. No doubt João was wise enough to remove the evidence even before the PJ were involved.
Unbelievably, pigs are very clean animals so their mess is removed regularly. No doubt had Joana's remains been disposed of in this way then João was wise enough to remove the evidence even before the PJ got involved. No bones and no manure.
In the final analysis however, only one or two people know what became of Joana Cipriano or if indeed she was murdered. Her remains, if they still exist, could be anywhere.
And then what did he do with it? Or wasn't he telling either? This would be hilarious if it wasn't so serious.
Joana is going to turn up alive one day. Won't that be fun.
if you look at Portuguese crime cases they seem to get a high level of confessions...it seems that criminals just want to confess to give the pj a nice easy job...in the uk avery low number of confessions...now why would that be?
And then what did he do with it? Or wasn't he telling either? This would be hilarious if it wasn't so serious.
Joana is going to turn up alive one day. Won't that be fun.
Who do you reckon is holding her captive then?
Paedos, gypsies, burglars or black guys?
I reckon Steve has got her.
They were the actions of a man who was afraid of being beaten again.
Not him Eleanor. He was playing a game and the PJ knew it.
ps you didn't answer my question?
You are a senior police officer and have a young girl missing on your patch. Her mother initially confesses to having bashed her head against a wall killing her and of asking her brother to hide the body. The woman is then incarcerated in prison and refuses to say where the girl is hidden. She gets a new lawyer and next thing you know she is denying the murder and refusing to cooperate. There is a small chance the girl might still be alive or at the very least you have a chance of recovering her remains and giving her a decent funeral, what do you do?
1. Do you accept what the mother now says and abandon the search.
2. Do you apply pressure to the mother in an attempt to save the child?
This was the predicament which Amaral and his men were faced with. They put their jobs and careers on the line for that little girl...the rest as they say is history.
Not him Eleanor. He was playing a game and the PJ knew it.
ps you didn't answer my question?
You are a senior police officer and have a young girl missing on your patch. Her mother initially confesses to having bashed her head against a wall killing her and of asking her brother to hide the body. The woman is then incarcerated in prison and refuses to say where the girl is hidden. She gets a new lawyer and next thing you know she is denying the murder and refusing to cooperate. There is a small chance the girl might still be alive or at the very least you have a chance of recovering her remains and giving her a decent funeral, what do you do?
1. Do you accept what the mother now says and abandon the search.
2. Do you apply pressure to the mother in an attempt to save the child?
This was the predicament which Amaral and his men were faced with. They put their jobs and careers on the line for that little girl...the rest as they say is history.
How many times does someone have to tell you before it gets into your head that in Portugal only confessions made in court before the judges are valid as evidence. Any other confession made before must be confirmed by the defendent in court and if the defendent remains silent, it's as if there had never been any confession at all. Therefore, it would be of no interest to the police to beat a confession out of a suspect. This safeguard came about after the fascist regime was overthrown in order to protect defendents because under Salazar confessions beaten out of suspects by the PIDE. These confessions were often the only evidence put before the judges and were always accepted as enough to put someone behind bars. Do you understand?I understand that you are trying to defend a corrupt system
Beliefs are badly overrated Dave, its evidence (all the evidence) which counts in the final analysis. Loads of rubbish are another issue.
Beliefs are badly overrated Dave, its evidence (all the evidence) which counts in the final analysis. Loads of rubbish are another issue.
For heavens sake Eleanor, Leonor confessed before the investigating magistrate before her new lawyer persuaded her to fight the case. Not a finger had been laid on her as up until that moment she had been allowed home. You really must try and understand the facts.
The only reason Leonor confessed was because just for a moment, she regretted what she had done.
In your opinion.
Leonor had told Leandro that she'd been beaten. He also stated that he and others had been in those early days as well. Beaten or not, psychological pressure and bluff can lead to false confessions, as I'm sure you're aware.
Violence was a way of life to the savage uncle convicted of murdering his own niece ... indeed, he had already served a prison term for attemped murder ( for money ) in which a man was left blinded
This unspeakable pair are where they belong
Now you are making it up Sadie. Leonor was living at home each night up until her arrest and initial confession. Had there been any coercion we would have certainly heard about it.
Why ever not, he liked dishing it out. The PJ knew only too well that there was only one language known to João Cipriano, the language of violence.
If they are indeed guilty, I agree with you that they are where they belong. However, I haven't found anything of substance to indicate that they are. Whatever the uncle got up to in the past isn't a justifiable reason to beat the hell out of people (or even the psychological equivalent) in police interrogations, IMO. Not just from a human rights perspective, but because people can end up making false confessions.
Have you read a complete court transcript Carana ? ... do you know precisely what evidence was placed before the court which led to a conviction for murder ?
If not , then questioning the guilty verdict reached by judge and jury is simply not appropriate
Have you read a complete court transcript Carana ? ... do you know precisely what evidence was placed before the court which led to a conviction for murder ?
If not , then questioning the guilty verdict reached by judge and jury is simply not appropriate
And let us not forget the following - which is yet to come to court:-
http://www.publico.pt/sociedade/noticia/mp-acusa-exinspector-da-pj-goncalo-amaral-de-tortura-a-leandro-silva-1389690
MP accuses former PJ inspector Gonçalo Amaral torture Leandro Silva
The Public Ministry (MP) accused former Inspector of Judicial Police Gonçalo Amaral assault Leandro Silva, companion Leonor Cipriano, convicted of murder and concealment of a body of her daughter Joana Cipriano, in 2004, in the Algarve.
End quote
The whole case stinks IMHO.
I thought that was thrown out the next year after it was lodged? Ie 2010
Do you have any documentary evidence its been reinstated? And awaiting trial?
Not at the moment and I haven't got time to look right now. If I'm wrong I will happily withdraw the post.
Have you got any documentary evidence that it was thrown out? I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but I've never seen any.
How many times does someone have to tell you before it gets into your head that in Portugal only confessions made in court before the judges are valid as evidence. Any other confession made before must be confirmed by the defendent in court and if the defendent remains silent, it's as if there had never been any confession at all. Therefore, it would be of no interest to the police to beat a confession out of a suspect. This safeguard came about after the fascist regime was overthrown in order to protect defendents because under Salazar confessions beaten out of suspects by the PIDE. These confessions were often the only evidence put before the judges and were always accepted as enough to put someone behind bars. Do you understand?
Not him Eleanor. He was playing a game and the PJ knew it.
ps you didn't answer my question?
You are a senior police officer and have a young girl missing on your patch. Her mother initially confesses to having bashed her head against a wall killing her and of asking her brother to hide the body. The woman is then incarcerated in prison and refuses to say where the girl is hidden. She gets a new lawyer and next thing you know she is denying the murder and refusing to cooperate. There is a small chance the girl might still be alive or at the very least you have a chance of recovering her remains and giving her a decent funeral, what do you do?
1. Do you accept what the mother now says and abandon the search.
2. Do you apply pressure to the mother in an attempt to save the child?
This was the predicament which Amaral and his men were faced with. They put their jobs and careers on the line for that little girl...the rest as they say is history.
Not at the moment and I haven't got time to look right now. If I'm wrong I will happily withdraw the post.
Have you got any documentary evidence that it was thrown out? I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but I've never seen any.
So you would let the little lamb rot Sadie? And all because it had to be done prim and proper?There is nothing prim and proper about thorough investigations and forensic proof John.
As I have siad before, I believe Joana to be alive. And I believe Madeleine to be alive too.
We know, you showed us the pic and provided the proof!!!Do not misquote me, Red.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2853.msg106782#msg106782
Post 1022
8((()*/
There is nothing prim and proper about thorough investigations and forensic proof John.
It is no good trying to use emotive language on me, John. Such silly talk about letting the little lamb rot. No indications at all that joana has died; just the word and manipulations of a cop who turned out to be a Court proven liar . twice over
Seems you think that torture is OK ? So you wouldn't have minded if they had used it on you? My bet is that you wouldn't have been half as brave as Leonor. Such a brave woman.
As I have siad before, I believe Joana to be alive. And I believe Madeleine to be alive too.
Do you really admire psychopaths?Your logic for that remark please Montclair
I thought that was thrown out the next year after it was lodged? Ie 2010
Do you have any documentary evidence its been reinstated? And awaiting trial?
We know, you showed us the pic and provided the proof!!!
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2853.msg106782#msg106782
Post 1022
8((()*/
There is nothing prim and proper about thorough investigations and forensic proof John.
It is no good trying to use emotive language on me, John. Such silly talk about letting the little lamb rot. No indications at all that joana has died; just the word and manipulations of a cop who turned out to be a Court proven liar . twice over
Seems you think that torture is OK ? So you wouldn't have minded if they had used it on you? My bet is that you wouldn't have been half as brave as Leonor. Such a brave woman.
As I have siad before, I believe Joana to be alive. And I believe Madeleine to be alive too.
Bye bye Sadie, you have totally gone over the realms of reality if you think that women is a brave woman.
Anyway isnt there a seperate thread for Cipriano case?
She killed her daughter, now say after me.....
She killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughter.
GET IT? The child is dead. 8)><(
It was reported in the press and I have linked to it before but like you, I dont have it to hand! But dont worry, I will find it and repost.
I have read on forums where posters say it is coming up for trial but seen no reports on it anywhere at all? I have asked certain psters to provide a link in the past, none were able to do so.....indeed ine said well, you wil just have to believe me lol
Eta here is a headline, from 2010, its not the link I was looking for with more detail though, will find it
http://www.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF8&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cmjornal.xl.pt%2Fdetalhe%2Fnoticias%2Fnacional%2Fportugal%2Fgoncalo-amaral-nao-vai-a-julgamento
Bye bye Sadie, you have totally gone over the realms of reality if you think that women is a brave woman.
Anyway isnt there a seperate thread for Cipriano case?
She killed her daughter, now say after me.....
She killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughter.
GET IT? The child is dead. 8)><(
Perhaps the mods could move discussion about the Cipriano case over to that sub-forum?
I don't understand your emotional stance concerning this case when there's no evidence that the child is even dead.
ARE YOU SERIOUS?
Her uncle admitted she died..........and they disposed of her body.....jeez this is ridiculous. She died get over it and move on. This case has nothing to do with the McCanns case.
Oh yeh apart from Amaral.
STOP dragging up the memory of this child for your own reasons.
This child was brutally murdered by her family.
JUST because they didnt find a body doesnt mean she is still alive, just that they havent found her body yet....
They have to keep Joana alive , it's support for the McCann family myth of child abductors in Portugal.
There are child abductors in every country
ARE YOU SERIOUS?
Her uncle admitted she died..........and they disposed of her body.....jeez this is ridiculous. She died get over it and move on. This case has nothing to do with the McCanns case.
Oh yeh apart from Amaral.
STOP dragging up the memory of this child for your own reasons.
This child was brutally murdered by her family.
JUST because they didnt find a body doesnt mean she is still alive, just that they havent found her body yet....
the pros havea deep denial of death its as though they are scared of it...........
Children don't die Carly, that is a FACT.
but but children die around the world everyday do they care about babies who die in africa everyday??
..but davel you were saying the other day accidental child deaths don't occur.
Or perhaps you were miss typing there as well.
Bye bye Sadie, you have totally gone over the realms of reality if you think that women is a brave woman.colom
Anyway isnt there a seperate thread for Cipriano case?
She killed her daughter, now say after me.....
She killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughterShe killed her daughter.
GET IT? The child is dead. 8)><(
ARE YOU SERIOUS?
Her uncle admitted she died..........and they disposed of her body.....jeez this is ridiculous. She died get over it and move on. This case has nothing to do with the McCanns case.
Oh yeh apart from Amaral.
STOP dragging up the memory of this child for your own reasons.
This child was brutally murdered by her family.
JUST because they didnt find a body doesnt mean she is still alive, just that they havent found her body yet....
The only reason Leonor confessed was because just for a moment, she regretted what she had done.
How would you know this?
Not even her priest would!
The arrest and trial of Leanor and João Cipriano.
Some background facts in the case...
- Joana disappeared on the night of 12 September 2004.
- Leonor Cipriano was arrested and detained from 25 September 2004 while her brother, João Cipriano, was arrested two days later.
- The trial was due to commence on Wednesday 12 October 2005 but even before the reading of the indictment there was confusion over which lawyer had the legal authority to represent Leonor. In the end lawyer João Grado was tasked with the defence with Lisbon lawyers João Vaz and Oliveira Cruz standing down.
- The trial was heard by a three judge panel headed by Alda Casimiro, seconded by Manuel Rui Banaco and Advinco Sequeira and included four jurors (three women and one man) chosen from the electoral roll in Portimão. The final decision was up to the four jurors chosen from the electoral roll, namely, Diamene Silva (20) student, Marica Cunha (27) librarian technician, Marta Pereira (22) physiotherapist and Fernando Gonçalves (48) waiter.
- Leonor and her brother, João Cipriano, uncle of the eight-year-old girl, were accused of murder, desecration of a corpse and concealment.
- The defendants refused to speak after the reading of the indictment having been advised of the advantages by their respective lawyers “entrar mudo e sair calado”.
- Investigations conducted by the Judicial Police of Faro coordinated by Gonçalo Amaral did not reach any clear proof against Leonor and João Cipriano - just a theory, a story that the prosecutor José Pinheiro struggled to defend in court.
- The trial heard how João Cipriano sent police to dozens of places where the dismembered body of Joan supposedly lay, including wastelands, waterways, sewers drains, dumps and piggeries.
- The trial heard testimony from 45 prosecution witnesses: neighbours, relatives, PJ inspectors involved in the investigation, forensic experts.
- In the first session of the trial, Joana's stepfather, António Leandro, admitted that João Cipriano confessed that he and Leonor would answer for the crime of murder, desecration and hiding the corpse of little Joana. "He told me that the girl had seen them having sex and that they had killed the girl". However, Leandro received a totally different version from Leonor when he visited her in prison. Leonor told him that the corpse of Joana was in an old house, where she had been "taken to the back", but he found nothing.
- The issue of Joana's maltreatment was raised several times but was not proven by any witness. A psychologist from the Protection of Minors, Ana Sofia Paias, said she detected " poverty ", but not abuse.
- Neighbours and acquaintances of Leonor and brother João were called by the prosecution to assess the personality of the accused. The first witnesses, spoke of the past of Leonor Cipriano, questioned her performance as a mother of six children by five different relationships.
- A military GNR, Fernando Fernandes Ferreira, who was stationed in Portimao when the acts were committed, gave evidence to the Court via video - conferencing system.
- In about six hours of sitting, twenty witnesses were heard in the Court of Portimão - which attested to the rapidity with which the trial proceeded.
- The trial heard that marks of blood were found both inside and outside the house by someone of Joana's height. These traces of blood could not be forensically attributed to the girl - because they were contaminated by oil and bleach which had been used to clean the house after the crime.
- Trace of blood both animal and human were found in the family freezer. The prosecution claimed that the defendants hid the body there before disposing of it.
- Joana's stepfather, Leandro Silva, confirmed to the court that a saw normally kept at the Cipriano home had disappeared after the crime.
- A veterinarian, Cristina Simões, was called to testify in court. When questioned by prosecutor José Pinheiro Franco she said five or six pigs would be able to eat a body like Joana in 10 or 12 hours.
- On the last day of the trial the voice of João Cipriano was heard in court by virtue of a video recording made by the Judicial Police during investigations. In brutal detail he confessed to killing Joana and of disposing of her body. The defence objected claiming that João's words had no value since the defendants chose not to testify at trial. The judge overruled the objection.
- Joana's stepfather, Leandro, also made a brief statement, acknowledging that a hacksaw which he used for manual labour had disappeared from the family home.
- At the conclusion of the evidence the prosecutor appealed to the pair, "If you have any little humanity left, tell us where the body is?"
- Prosecuting attorney, José Pinheiro, during closing arguments in the case asked for a sentence of 24 years for both defendants. Leonor was seen to be visibly distressed at this.
- The trial lasted for 20 hours in total spread over three days. On 11 November 2005, the verdicts were announced at Portimão Court with Leonor and João Cipriano being convicted of murder, desecration of a corpse and concealment.
- There were disagreements between prosecutors and the Judge of Instruction. The MP wanted a sentence of between 12-25 years while Judge Ana Soares was of the view that there were only indications of the practice by the defendants and suggested a sentence of between 16 months to six years and eight months was more appropriate.
- In the end, Leonor was sentenced to 20 yrs and 4 months while João was sentenced to 19 yrs and 2 months. Leonor was given a longer sentence since she was the mother of the child.
ARE YOU SERIOUS?
Her uncle admitted she died..........and they disposed of her body.....jeez this is ridiculous. She died get over it and move on. This case has nothing to do with the McCanns case.
Oh yeh apart from Amaral.
STOP dragging up the memory of this child for your own reasons.
This child was brutally murdered by her family.
JUST because they didnt find a body doesnt mean she is still alive, just that they havent found her body yet....
There is a seperate thread for the cipriano case and that's why I was so surprised that a mod wanted to discuss it at length on this forum. Iits been discussed at length on its own forum and its obvious to me the evidence was very weak to non existent. Portugal seem to rely heavily on confessions and innuendo...as in the McCann case building a case in the press through leaks so that by the time the case gets to court a fair trial is impossible. This also seems to have happened in the Knox case in Italy...the judge has now admitted his judgement was swayed...although I don't know enough about the case to have a valid opinion.
You must understand that posters have different viewpoints and their viewpoints are just as valid..
The arrest and trial of Leanor and João Cipriano.
Some background facts in the case...
- Joana disappeared on the night of 12 September 2004.
- Leonor Cipriano was arrested and detained from 25 September 2004 while her brother, João Cipriano, was arrested two days later.
- The trial was due to commence on Wednesday 12 October 2005 but even before the reading of the indictment there was confusion over which lawyer had the legal authority to represent Leonor. In the end lawyer João Grado was tasked with the defence with Lisbon lawyers João Vaz and Oliveira Cruz standing down.
- The trial was heard by a three judge panel headed by Alda Casimiro, seconded by Manuel Rui Banaco and Advinco Sequeira and included four jurors (three women and one man) chosen from the electoral roll in Portimão. The final decision was up to the four jurors chosen from the electoral roll, namely, Diamene Silva (20) student, Marica Cunha (27) librarian technician, Marta Pereira (22) physiotherapist and Fernando Gonçalves (48) waiter.
- Leonor and her brother, João Cipriano, uncle of the eight-year-old girl, were accused of murder, desecration of a corpse and concealment.
- The defendants refused to speak after the reading of the indictment having been advised of the advantages by their respective lawyers “entrar mudo e sair calado”.
- Investigations conducted by the Judicial Police of Faro coordinated by Gonçalo Amaral did not reach any clear proof against Leonor and João Cipriano - just a theory, a story that the prosecutor José Pinheiro struggled to defend in court.
- The trial heard how João Cipriano sent police to dozens of places where the dismembered body of Joan supposedly lay, including wastelands, waterways, sewers drains, dumps and piggeries.
- The trial heard testimony from 45 prosecution witnesses: neighbours, relatives, PJ inspectors involved in the investigation, forensic experts.
- In the first session of the trial, Joana's stepfather, António Leandro, admitted that João Cipriano confessed that he and Leonor would answer for the crime of murder, desecration and hiding the corpse of little Joana. "He told me that the girl had seen them having sex and that they had killed the girl". However, Leandro received a totally different version from Leonor when he visited her in prison. Leonor told him that the corpse of Joana was in an old house, where she had been "taken to the back", but he found nothing.
- The issue of Joana's maltreatment was raised several times but was not proven by any witness. A psychologist from the Protection of Minors, Ana Sofia Paias, said she detected " poverty ", but not abuse.
- Neighbours and acquaintances of Leonor and brother João were called by the prosecution to assess the personality of the accused. The first witnesses, spoke of the past of Leonor Cipriano, questioned her performance as a mother of six children by five different relationships.
- A military GNR, Fernando Fernandes Ferreira, who was stationed in Portimao when the acts were committed, gave evidence to the Court via video - conferencing system.
- In about six hours of sitting, twenty witnesses were heard in the Court of Portimão - which attested to the rapidity with which the trial proceeded.
- The trial heard that marks of blood were found both inside and outside the house by someone of Joana's height. These traces of blood could not be forensically attributed to the girl - because they were contaminated by oil and bleach which had been used to clean the house after the crime.
- Trace of blood both animal and human were found in the family freezer. The prosecution claimed that the defendants hid the body there before disposing of it.
- Joana's stepfather, Leandro Silva, confirmed to the court that a saw normally kept at the Cipriano home had disappeared after the crime.
- A veterinarian, Cristina Simões, was called to testify in court. When questioned by prosecutor José Pinheiro Franco she said five or six pigs would be able to eat a body like Joana in 10 or 12 hours.
- On the last day of the trial the voice of João Cipriano was heard in court by virtue of a video recording made by the Judicial Police during investigations. In brutal detail he confessed to killing Joana and of disposing of her body. The defence objected claiming that João's words had no value since the defendants chose not to testify at trial. The judge overruled the objection.
- Joana's stepfather, Leandro, also made a brief statement, acknowledging that a hacksaw which he used for manual labour had disappeared from the family home.
- At the conclusion of the evidence the prosecutor appealed to the pair, "If you have any little humanity left, tell us where the body is?"
- Prosecuting attorney, José Pinheiro, during closing arguments in the case asked for a sentence of 24 years for both defendants. Leonor was seen to be visibly distressed at this.
- The trial lasted for 20 hours in total spread over three days. On 11 November 2005, the verdicts were announced at Portimão Court with Leonor and João Cipriano being convicted of murder, desecration of a corpse and concealment.
- There were disagreements between prosecutors and the Judge of Instruction. The MP wanted a sentence of between 12-25 years while Judge Ana Soares was of the view that there were only indications of the practice by the defendants and suggested a sentence of between 16 months to six years and eight months was more appropriate.
- In the end, Leonor was sentenced to 20 yrs and 4 months while João was sentenced to 19 yrs and 2 months. Leonor was given a longer sentence since she was the mother of the child.
This. I find it genuinely upsetting. It's as though she's been assigned a walk on role in the Madeleine Mccann saga.
There is a thread about her and if any of you really think that she could still be alive, I suggest you start doing something about it. There are missing persons and Miscarriage of justice organisations you could contact. Look in to some of the MOJ'S that have been resolved and speak to the people involved with them.
If your only interest in Joana is to use as an example of how shit Dr Amaral is though, I really think you should consider that she was a real live little girl who has suffered terribly.
if these two were innocent where are all the "free the ciprianos /miscarriage of justice " campaigns?
>@@(*&)
Has no one really fought for them?
>@@(*&)
Interesting question. Are there any Portuguese forums related to potential miscarriages of justice?
Campaigns carana by family and friends fightng for them NOT internet chat forums!
where are they? ie their family and friends fightng and sayng they are innocent?
Ive read reports to the contrary, family disowning them!!!
Campaigns carana by family and friends fightng for them NOT internet chat forums!
where are they? ie their family and friends fightng and sayng they are innocent?
Ive read reports to the contrary, family disowning them!!!
Yes, the family of her first relationship doesn't seem to keen on her, but that was way in the past.
Other than that, my question still stands: are there any Portuguese forums pointing out potential miscarriages or not? There may be, but I haven't come across any.
As to the family... they seem to be extremely poor and probably have little schooling. Without support from the media, what could they actually do?
The threat of criminal libel may not be too encouraging, either. I wonder why this threat is still on the books in the land of free speech? Odd that.
internet chat forums are not the same as family friends and others campaigns trying to free innocents or get justice for the perpetrators!!!
WAs Doreen Lawrence rich? Do pls dont play the poor card
As for libel yourehaving bloody laugh!
So, who has campaigned forthe ciprianos if this was such a miscarriage of justice!!
No one!
apart fom the lawyer out to get amaral lol years and years later
PooR ciprianos
So innocent no one is supporting them!!!!! Start a fund carana!
Im sure millions will flood in...but pls tell them NOT to spend it on lawyes or pr gurus and other snake merchants like that
and certainly NOT pay 37000 pounds or a hundred pound max website, cheers, pass the message on
I have great difficulty believing that there has been a miscarriage of justice in this case for several reasons. I also don't understand why people blindly pursue the belief that Leonor and brother João are whiter than white.
Much has been said about the absence of proof of guilt in this case and I agree to a certain extent. It comes down to circumstantial evidence but more importantly, the actions of the pair themselves.
From the beginning they were evasive and delayed contacting the police. It was left to the lady owner of the cafe to contact the GNR which in itself was a warning sign that all was not as it should have been. Regardless of where Joana was on that Sunday night, her mother, uncle and stepfather weren't at all concerned as to report it.
I don't think that there is any recourse left in Portugal once it went to the Supreme Court.I let you off
NB: I thought you had me on ignore?
I have great difficulty believing that there has been a miscarriage of justice in this case for several reasons. I also don't understand why people blindly pursue the belief that Leonor and brother João are whiter than white.
Much has been said about the absence of proof of guilt in this case and I agree to a certain extent. It comes down to circumstantial evidence but more importantly, the actions of the pair themselves.
From the beginning they were evasive and delayed contacting the police. It was left to the lady owner of the cafe to contact the GNR which in itself was a warning sign that all was not as it should have been. Regardless of where Joana was on that Sunday night, her mother, uncle and stepfather weren't at all concerned as to report it.
Both Leanor and João confessed as to their involvement in the girls accidental death and subsequent disposal of her remains. Leonor talks about beating her and hitting her head on the house wall which was fatal. She also speaks of asking João to hide the body. João for his part led the police to a dozen different locations where he claimed the body lay and told Leandro (Leonor's partner) that he had buried her out back. None of this came to anything.
I find it very difficult to believe that an innocent mother and uncle could behave in such a manner. It just does not make sense unless they were indeed involved in her disappearance or murder.
I let you off
Supreme court is no excuse for previous current or future campaigns
Where are they? No where
No one thnnks theyare innocent
I asked a question the other day... what makes you think that these convictions are safe?
What measures were in place to avoid any disputes concerning their time in police custody?
What else is there of any significance in a village context?
I haven't found any miscarriage of justice campaigns in Portugal concerning murder convictions.
Why not?
One possibility is that I simply haven't found them. Although one or two press articles in the quality press have asked questions, but not to the extent of a campaign.
Or...
Perhaps because Portugal has never, ever, screwed up, unlike any other country on the planet?
Why are you evading the question? Where are her family and friends campaigns? Ever!Nowhere
Very simply...
If you are an innocent mother whose child has been abducted you don't tell a magistrate that you killed her.
If you are an innocent uncle you don't tell your sisters partner that you disposed of her body out back and you don't take police round twelve or more locations claiming to know where her body lies.
You could of course argue that both are insane and incapable of normal thought processes but if that were the case they would not have stood trial for Joana's murder and would be in an asylum.
Then there is the evidence, her shoes and flip flops were all accounted for, tools suddenly went missing, the blood spatter on the wall and the floor, the human blood on the sandals under the settee and in the freezer, the purchase of special cleaning materials etc...
We then have the story of the body in the car sent to Spain, yet another pack of lies told by João?
The route between the church and Joana's house is lined with houses. I find it very hard to believe that she could be abducted in broad daylight in the middle of a village.
There were numerous arguidos in this case (I'll try to find how many if I can). They had to protect themselves and their own families at the time.
No one in the family / friends arena has any clear idea what actually did happen... but none of them seem to give credence to the prosecution's gruesome hypothesis.
From the interview with Leandro (two years after the event), he thinks supermarket lady may have taken her, but that he wouldn't have put it past João to have sold her. Leonor seems to be of a similar opinion, but is still wondering. João apparently wrote to his family to say that he thinks that Leonor sold her and that Leandro's family got the money for it.
They seem to be from very poor backgrounds, with little education, and may well feel tainted by the tabloid frenzy pointing the finger at anyone related to the Cipriano family and just want to get on with trying to earn a meagre living in a world in which they may feel that there is little they can do.
Oh I see, none of their famiy or friends believe them, or know what to believe, so didnt bother supporting them in any way, even if hey were "poor" and had to go out each day to earn a "meagre living"cheers
Her family and friends did fully support her in the 2009 appeal. Unfortunately it was all in vain, as Joao denied writing and signing his statement and the appeal was denied.
So many denials all the time, from every singke quarter, ho hum, and her other half has left her to rot in jail and taken up with someone else, ok
I see the support
Oh I see, none of their famiy or friends believe them, or know what to believe, so didnt bother supporting them in any way, even if hey were "poor" and had to go out each day to earn a "meagre living"cheers
Her family and friends did fully support her in the 2009 appeal. Unfortunately it was all in vain, as Joao denied writing and signing his statement and the appeal was denied.
I gave those two as examples - because they were mentioned in that article.
A different article, written 5 years after her disappearance, states that the locals believe she was either sold or kidnapped. So they don't seem to believe the "official" version, either.
As to why they haven't clubbed together to start a campaign... who knows?
Perhaps they have no idea how to start one or feel that there is no point after the Supreme Court ruling. I haven't noticed any campaigns on other cases, either... perhaps it's not part of the culture to speak openly against the authorities, particularly in a country in which criticism of a public official can find you slapped with criminal defamation charges.
http://www.dn.pt/inicio/portugal/interior.aspx?content_id=1359033&page=1
http://www.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF8&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dn.pt%2Finicio%2Fportugal%2Finterior.aspx%3Fcontent_id%3D1359033%26page%3D1
Extract of the article in Google speak:
Residents of Figueira believe that Joan was sold or kidnapped
by LUSA 11 setembro 2009
Five years after the disappearance of Joana Cipriano, the population of Figueira, where he lived, do not forget the case and since then keeps alive a sense of mistrust of strangers: almost everyone believes that the girl was abducted or sold.
Joan, aged eight, disappeared from that village in the municipality of Portimão Algarve to September 12, 2004, about 20:30, after shopping at a cafe near home at the request of the mother.
Speaking to Lusa, several residents say the disappearance of Joana "awakened" a sense of insecurity in the village, "forcing a constant attention and vigilance."
"I now have more attention, not only to my children but also other children I see on the street," says António Fernando, father of two children aged three and six years.
"I remain ever mindful of all movements of strangers and even acquaintances, especially when approaching children, because you never know who around us," he noted, adding that distrust increases when "outsiders are spotted trying to talk to minors. "
Cristina Campos, mother of an eight year old girl, sharing the same sentiment: "Even the neighbors came to distrust."
So her family didn't support her ie her brother!!!
they both blamed each other ith all sorts. Hardly "normal" in a missing child case
I don't find that surprising in a police bluff situation, with the main suspects held on remand with leaky fans down to
Correio da Manhã (CdaM), the main tabloid. CdaM does seem to have been the main unofficial outlet for the PJ.
I don't actually know whether the TV guide promo blurbs at the time were actively promoting prime-time matinée shows at the time, or whether this was a later invention.
have you been onthe wacky backy?
So where is the official statement, or some kind of proof of Leonor's confession to The Magistrate?
Not that I expect a reply to this request. But I would like to see it so that I might reevaluate my stance on this matter. Plus The Date of said statement, of course.
I expect that various posters on here will tell you to go to whether the files are held and consult them for yourself.
My view is that she may well have done, but the circumstances of what led up to this are so obscure that I don't give it much credence in terms of what actually happened to this little girl.
@ Leanor
I haven't found anything against João either concerning this case.
Maybe he was kicked after he confessed....and not before
No way of knowing is there? Did he ever retract his confession?
>@@(*&)
Which confession?
No, there's no way of knowing how he was treated... comprehensive CCTV and recorded interviews would have clarified all this.
Did he make more than one? The taped confession that was played in court. And, I agree, there is no way of knowing at which point he was kicked, before or after......
So did he retract it?
There was the taped reconstruction, which served as a confession in court, and was considered as a legal and valid alternative means of proof as it was supposedly "voluntary". I'm not aware that anything he may have said prior to that was recorded.So all conjecture and supposition then. And wonderful of two innocent people (siblings as well) shifting the blame on each other don't you think?
According to one article on here, he supposedly admitted to something or other at the end of the initial interrogation, but then refused to sign at the last minute and shifted half the blame to Leonor. It would take a while to find what he may or may not have signed in the end.
I don't see how he (or Leonor) could have retracted anything in court as the lawyers had advised them to remain silent.
So all conjecture and supposition then. And wonderful of two innocent people (siblings as well) shifting the blame on each other don't you think?
PS
You don't have to be in court to retract a confession!
Era
I take it then the brother never retracted his confession as his sister did, if not, why not?
I believe that Joao was beaten and threatened with more beatings. If they will beat a woman then they wouldn't think twice about beating a man.
I believe that Joao was beaten and threatened with more beatings. If they will beat a woman then they wouldn't think twice about beating a man.
As I said just earlier, he apparently refused to sign that initial confession.
Yes, I would find it odd that siblings would shift the blame onto each other if you get on, but it's hard to tell what exactly happened while they were being plied with coffee and biscuits at the PJ coffeeshop.
Leandro found the original Portimão PJ team quite civilised and wished they'd stayed on the case. The rough treatment started when the Faro boys took over, later reinforced by the DCCB boys from Lisbon.
Ah, The Boys From Lisbon. Unknown faces. What were they doing, getting involved?
hang on, you said he refused to admit to "something or other" at the end of an initial interrogation...and didn't sign something...that can't be the same as a taped confession can it? As a taped confession is not "something or other"
As for coffee and biscuits, being plied as you put it, I would never ever accuse my innocent sibling of anything so gross or anything at all, they could torture me to death if they wanted, get a grip won't you
The reconstruction (the only piece of "evidence" that appears to have been recorded) was quite some time after they'd both been charged and remanded in custod
hang on, you said he refused to admit to "something or other" at the end of an initial interrogation...and didn't sign something...that can't be the same as a taped confession can it? As a taped confession is not "something or other"
As for coffee and biscuits, being plied as you put it, I would never ever accuse my innocent sibling of anything so gross or anything at all, they could torture me to death if they wanted, get a grip won't you
Que? So? Did he retract his statement or not carana and if not why not if it was beaten out of him, his sister managed to do so
Also please stop ignoring issues changing the subject and obfuscating
That's a perfectly rational response... to an abstract situation.
They don't seem to have been close at all.
I've no idea which statement you're talking about.
I'm not ignoring issues, changing the subject or obfuscating. What do Leonor's inmates have to do with the subject?
The bit I still don't understand is why she failed to speak at her trial if she didn't kill the girl? The latest confession (if you believe it) is that her brother tried to sell Joana but something went wrong, at least according to Leonor, that is what Joao told her.
So what Leonor is basically saying is that she only knows what has been told to her by her brother. For all we know the girl was sold and Joao is spinning a yarn to protect his buyer. The story which Leonor originally told about slapping the girl could have also been a fabrication intended to protect her brother.
However, the forensics (non existent according to some) reveal blood stains on the very wall which Leonor said she pushed Joana against. Leonor could not have known about these blood stains unless there was some truth in what she originally confessed about slapping the girl.
Both Leonor and Joao are involved to some degree or other whichever scenario you choose to accept. Stranger abduction was a non starter!
Their lawyers advised them not to take the stand. The confessions would have carried considerable weight and there was no proof to present that they'd been beaten or coerced at that early stage.
On the forensics issue, the PJ had gone in with their UV lamp on 22nd Sept, i.e. a couple of days before she was carted off to the magistrate. The PJ therefore did have an opportunity to "assist her memory" concerning which wall the child was supposed to have cracked her head on.
Another point is that although blood was indeed found, the UV lamp would have shown up any biological traces (saliva, sweat, etc.). There is therefore no way of knowing whether the entire fluorescent area was blood or simply specks (possibly even old) of blood within an area of other substances. It's not even clear whether blood was found in all of the areas that fluoresced. Fluorescence close to a light switch or near a door is not necessarily indicative of anything untoward and the odd speck of blood wouldn't be unusual either. There were six people living in that house and there are bound to be specks of blood in any home. Some of it was human, some animal and some animal and human. As the PJ didn't turn up until 10 days after the disappearance, there's no way of knowing whether when the spots of blood had been deposited. On its own, there doesn't seem to be anything inconsistent with a nicked finger.
Why is that do you suggest?
Sorry, I don't understand your question.
Do you not think it just a tad odd Carana, that all these years and she hasn't shown the slightest interest in pursuing a search for Joana? That includes Joana's father and her stepfather too. It would seem that everyone connected to Joana is of the opinion that she is indeed deceased.
Why no search?
more apologist waffle!
How would you have organised a search for a missing child back then if you had found yourself in prison,with limited contact with the outside world, with little or no understanding of the Internet?
Add to that that your country's tabloids, and the courts, all deemed you guilty of one of the most atrocious crimes imaginable for reasons that don't correspond to what actually happened.
Where do you start? And what do you do?
The GNR / rescue services hadn't found her; she wasn't at any of her relatives... ergo adults in the home at the time "did it". No body? No problem. She was chopped up and fed to pigs, taken in a car to be squashed over the border (which hadn't received an alert about the case, apparently) ... But, hey ho, anything goes. Case solved.
Yes indeed...it helps though when the mother confesses and the brother is prepared to take te police out searching twelve locations where he said he buried her remains. Bizarre!! 8-)(--)
Confessions after they had been tortured, John?
I know that you will say that they confessed first, but why are you so sure when Amaral is a twice convicted liar and Cristavao is allegedly charged with 7 gangster like offences. They sound like two bad pennies to me ... and I am being kind.
He also allegedly personally beat Leandro up, putting him in hospital, in order to give a (false) witness statement, which Leandro has since rescinded.
As lead detective Amaral must have arranged for the DCCB (terrorist squad) to come from Lisbon to do the main torture, but are you so sure that:
1) He didn't apply a bit of torture himself early on? He did to Leandro it seems.
2) He has told the truth about Leonor confessing on a date before the "official" torture dates?
The guy has proved that he cant be trusted, he lied to the Courts. He is a criminal, yet you still trust him? Jeez John, are you ever gullible ?
Only my opinion, but the pointers are there. Plus several more, which I haven't mentioned this time
No Sadie, please stop posting false information. Leonor only spoke at the preliminary hearing when she was fully committed to custody. She told the magistrate that she had beaten Joana, that she had hit her head and died. That brother João had panicked and disposed of her in some waste ground out back.
Leonor was beaten AFTER she was committed to prison. A new lawyer took over and she never testified at her trial.
To answer your last points, Leonor was taken home every night prior to her committal. If she was beaten then or threatened she never said to anyone or showed any signs of it. Ultimately, its anyone's guess what went on in Lagos.
As Anna pointed out, the Spanish authorities don't seem to have been alerted to a potential abduction... why not?
It was a miscarriage of Justice if ever there was one. Who knows that she gave a confession? there is no record of it and I thought it was her brother, but she had to go where he went it seems.
As for Joao taking the police on useless searches, What would you do to get a break from being beaten?. He was such a coward that he even blamed his brother of involvement. If he knew where the body was he would have told the PJ.
the pj admitted that Leonor faked illness to get away from interrogation for a while.....Why would she do that, if she wasn't being beaten, as she claimed back in September 2004.
She wasn't listened too until someone in a high position saw the injuries for herself.
As soon as she was arrested PJ cancelled Interpol and they never did alert the borders.....
Who knows that she gave a confession? Well, everyone in court including the Press who reported it. Maybe they made it all up just for the hell of it?
No Sadie, please stop posting false information. Leonor only spoke at the preliminary hearing when she was fully committed to custody. She told the magistrate that she had beaten Joana, that she had hit her head and died. That brother João had panicked and disposed of her in some waste ground out back.
Leonor was beaten AFTER she was committed to prison. A new lawyer took over and she never testified at her trial.
To answer your last points, Leonor was taken home every night prior to her committal. If she was beaten then or threatened she never said to anyone or showed any signs of it. Ultimately, its anyone's guess what went on in Lagos.
Who knows that she gave a confession? Well, everyone in court including the Press who reported it. Maybe they made it all up just for the hell of it?
Well there was plenty of stuff made up............................................For the hell of it?
There is no false information there John. Read my post more carefully.
I am questioning if Amaral personally tortured Or maybe even threatened Leonor, [and joao?] which caused her so called "confession".?
His personal treatment of Leandro, only alleged admittedly, which put him in hospital, illustrates what he is alledgedly capable of.
He was head honcho when Kate was taken in for questioning. Look at the deal he was trying to broker with her. (From memory) " Kate to admit Madeleines death and 'you will only get 2 years' "
I am asking,
Did he try to broker a similar sort of deal with Leonor, or beat her into it ? Did she originally go along with it, because he had threatened to take her children away or to put her in prison for, say, 20 years if she didn't "admit "... or he had beaten her ?
Leandro seemed to think that Leonor had been badly treated and in the early days too. He has said so.
And John, Amaral has shown that he is a liar and con-man
1. He tried to con Gerry at his arguido meeting. Giving out false information to him, seemingly totally incriminating information. From that moment on Gerry knew they were being fitted up. It was obvious.
2. All the talk about Leonor being an awful mother with an awful home. That Joana was very unhappy. Photographic evidence shows that was untrue, John and falsely put about
3. The make believe scenario that Joana came home and found her mother and uncle Joao having sex together. IIRC, even the Judge didn't believe that one.
4. Then there is the cutting up the body, the keeping in the fridge and feeding to the pigs .... or the body being crushed in an old car at a crushing plant ... or carrying off of the body in pieces in a carrier bag. ... or the burying in the hills ..... or .....................
5. And of course he has been found guilty in two Courts of Perjury. Lying.
Come on John. why are you twisting my meaning and making out things that are not correct? Why are you spinning and saying that I am putting about false information when I clearly am not.
Read my post carefully John ... and I would be grateful if you would amend your post.
As I would mine, if I were mistaken
John,
I truly think that your defense of eveything Amaral does would be better served if you gave up promoting him
Cos tbh, there is so much against him that all you are doing is prompting it all to be revealed over and over.
Just my opinion of course
Don't get me wrong Anna, I do agree but it adds up since that was the reason the magistrate remanded her in custody but bailed João. She said she did it, whether this was a lie is not known since her story later changed. She could have been covering for her brother, maybe she was more scared of him. Remember she later wrote to him pleading forgiveness.
-
Don't get me wrong Anna, I do agree but it adds up since that was the reason the magistrate remanded her in custody but bailed João. She said she did it, whether this was a lie is not known since her story later changed. She could have been covering for her brother, maybe she was more scared of him. Remember she later wrote to him pleading forgiveness.
-
Has anyone seen a written copy of Leonor's confession?
They both said that they had done it.
They both said that the other one had done it.
They both apologised for saying that the other one had done it.
They both gave different accounts of how they had done.
Neither of then knew exactly how the body had been disposed of.
Neither of then knew where the body was.
Did anyone know what had gone on? Or did they all agree that The PJ were right, depending on what seemed the most feasible?
The only confession that's out there is the 2009 appeal one and it was thrown out of court.
The letter begging forgiveness, I think must be a Myth . I did read that Joao had asked forgiveness, but its not in my paperwork that I can see, I will however continue the search. It could have been on that site that tells a lot of lies .
Don't get me wrong Anna, I do agree but it adds up since that was the reason the magistrate remanded her in custody but bailed João. She said she did it, whether this was a lie is not known since her story later changed. She could have been covering for her brother, maybe she was more scared of him. Remember she later wrote to him pleading forgiveness. -Did you get that the right way round, John?
Ok, you inferred in your question that Leonor was tortured before her initial confession. Always remember that she confessed a second time just before the PJ trials. This time she confessed that it was all João's doing, an abduction with a view to selling Joana but that it all went horribly wrong.No John I didn't infer anything. I questioned, NOT inferred ... and pointed out how unreliable Amaral is ... that he is a convicted liar and that he allegedly personally smacked Leandro up so badly, to obtain a false witness statement, that Leandro was admitted to hospital. I cant remember the exact details but I think it was for several days. Pls correct me if I am wrong.
Sadie, your hate of Dr Amaral is clouding your judgement. There is no evidence to suggest he ever touched Leonor or even threatened her. He was not convicted of any torture by any court so please keep this in mind.
As for threatening Kate, Dr Amaral was never in the same room as the McCanns never mind threaten them. In any event, he couldn't speak English and they couldn't speak Portuguese.
Please keep a sense of proportion about your posts.
Has anyone seen a written copy of Leonor's confession?
They both said that they had done it.
They both said that the other one had done it.
They both apologised for saying that the other one had done it.
They both gave different accounts of how they had done.
Neither of then knew exactly how the body had been disposed of.
Neither of then knew where the body was.
Did anyone know what had gone on? Or did they all agree that The PJ were right, depending on what seemed the most feasible?
Is this the case where the police said the accused deliberately threw herself down a staircase, but the injuries looked suspiciously like she had been repeatedly punched in both eyes?
What savages the Portuguese police seem to be. That poor woman.
If I'm correct, her daughter has never been found. Which would leave open the possibility she could still be alive.
John
With all due respect had this been a matter for the UK authorities, given their illiterate status, I've no doubt the Ciprianos would not only had legal representation from the start but allocated Appropriate Adults as well. One cannot help wondering what would have been the outcome if that had happened.
Are you suggesting they had 'learning difficulties' to the extent they were unfit adults?
I don't think that it is a case of that, John.
Who with 3-4 years of education and pro bono lawyers with limited time could have adequately defended them? It really wouldn't take a top-notch lawyer to have pointed out even the basics of how flimsy this case was.
As I've said umpteen times, if they are guilty then they are where they should be. My issue is that I'm not convinced that they are guilty - in which case, someone else is, who may still be free.
They have admitted their guilt on several occasions Carana, that's good enough for me.
But John they have been tortured. That alters the whole equation.
A tortured person does as s/he is told.
So why are organizations like Amnesty International and the Council for Europe Committee for the Prevention of Torture so interested in her case?
I'll tell you why. Because it's all in the public domain. Whether you like it or not, whether I like it or not, whether the Portuguese Government like it or not and I'd say in their case definitely not Leonor Cipriano has become the public face of police brutality in Portugal. I'm sorry John but you simply cannot sweep the matter of police brutality under the carpet. As it is if it had been a UK matter I rather doubt if the CPS would have taken the matter any further.
Why are you confusing two issues PV? I stated that Leonor was not tortured prior to her initial confession before an examining magistrate prior to being remanded in custody. You then went off at a tangent posting about Amnesty International and the Council for Europe Committee for the Prevention of Torture?
Can we please keep on topic. TY
I stated that Leonor was not tortured prior to her initial confession before an examining magistrate prior to being remanded in custody.
Case closed 8((()*/
It was until her new lawyer started messing with her head and encouraging her to plead innocence. The same idiot who had a dream that Madeleine could be found at the bottom of the Arade Dam nearby Figueira and persuaded Método 3 to spend Madeleine Fund cash on yet another wild goose chase.
As meninas que vieram das estralas and all that. Read that too.
Still won the libel trial Amaral brought against him though didn't he?
I stated that Leonor was not tortured prior to her initial confession before an examining magistrate prior to being remanded in custody.Case is NOT CLOSED to me and several other thinkers on here. According to Leandro she was badly treated physically, [IIRC.]
Case closed 8((()*/
There are no surprises in Portuguese courts, except with perhaps a confession in front of the judge, with regard to evidence presented. If the video of João Cipriano's reconstruction was admitted, the defense lawyers knew about it. I think that it is important that posters do not forget that, in Portugal, the justice system is "inquisitorial" and not "adversarial" and that there are no Perry Mason moments in the courts rooms.
The question is when they found out that it would be admitted as evidence. One of the points in the appeal, after all, was arguing that it shouldn't have been presented as the defendants had opted not to take the stand and no confessions would be admissible. If they had found out late in the trial, they might have reconsidered their advice.
I'm aware that the system is inquisitorial, but it was still a trial with a jury.
I'd be curious to know what the extent of legal aid actually is (or was at the time). Could the defence have brought in counter experts or not? Or conducted their own forensic analysis?
What's the point Carana, they both confessed to the murder. Talk about flogging a dead horse!
Stefan Kiszko also confessed to the murder of Lesley Molseed without a solicitor being present then later retracted his confession. He served 16 years for a crime later proven he didn't commit - and his conviction was achieved by the police aided in no small part by suppressed evidence & false witness statements.
Why is it so difficult for some people to accept that Leonor may possibly be innocent of killing Joana - is it because they would then have to accept some of the reasons behind political assistance for the McCanns?
Had Leonor alone confessed I would have been just a tad sceptical but both of them independently told stories which converged. To be honest I still am not sure which one of them was the actual killer, certainly they both played a part in Joana's demise.
What's the point Carana, they both confessed to the murder. Talk about flogging a dead horse!
What astonishes me with the cipriano case is that the PJ were happy for cipriano to appear in court with a face that looked as though it had been in a car crash...they knew they were above the law and would not face justice. their excuse...she had fallen down the stairs...Although the court accepted she had been beaten in custody it could not be decided who had beaten her...so as they knew...they could beat with impunity
What astonishes me with the cipriano case is that the PJ were happy for cipriano to appear in court with a face that looked as though it had been in a car crash...they knew they were above the law and would not face justice. their excuse...she had fallen down the stairs...Although the court accepted she had been beaten in custody it could not be decided who had beaten her...so as they knew...they could beat with impunity
The main reason I don't think the killed Joana is because there is no credible reason that I can think of why - having confessed to murder, they should then both refuse to say what they did with the body. If they had already confessed to the major crime, then why not divulge what they did with the body. It makes no sense for them not to.
IMO the reason they did not say - (even after the most horrendous torture), where the body was = is because they simply didn't know - because Joana had been abducted. What other reason could there be?
Yes indeed Sadie, if you completely ignore the childs bloodied hand print on the wall & the missing hacksaw, then it's quite obvious not only that the Ciprianos are 100% innocent, but that Joana is a real live findable child.
And Joana's abductor remains at large, doesn't he, she or they.
The PJ never found that Hacksaw the abductor stole either.
The injustice.
The Saw which Leandro Silva testified had gone missing from the Cipriano family home just after Joana disappeared.
That Saw.
Am I right in saying that the Judge did not believe the story that Joana had come home and found them "at it" ?
And Joana's abductor remains at large, doesn't he, she or they.
The PJ never found that Hacksaw the abductor stole either.
The injustice.
They never found the saw that João allegedly butchered her with, either. Nor any forensic evidence that would have substantiated it.
The main reason I don't think the killed Joana is because there is no credible reason that I can think of why - having confessed to murder, they should then both refuse to say what they did with the body. If they had already confessed to the major crime, then why not divulge what they did with the body. It makes no sense for them not to.
IMO the reason they did not say - (even after the most horrendous torture), where the body was = is because they simply didn't know - because Joana had been abducted. What other reason could there be?
There wasn't even any circumstantial evidence in the case was there, & circumstantial evidence isn't even evidence , according to dave.
Yes indeed Sadie, if you completely ignore the childs bloodied hand print on the wall & the missing hacksaw, then it's quite obvious not only that the Ciprianos are 100% innocent, but that Joana is a real live findable child.
I don't know where this "child's bloodied hand print on the wall" idea came from aside from mangled leaks to tabloids.
The PJ visited the house with a black torch. A black torch will show traces of any biological human fluid, including sweat. They (rightly) took swabs and found some traces of blood in that spot. There is no way of knowing whether a) it was an identifiable hand-print or a fluorescent area by a light switch worthy of checking, b) hers, c) specks of blood that could have been deposited at any time by anyone who lived there within that general fluorescent patch, the rest being potentially anyone's sweaty hand touching the area...
None of the blood traces found (anywhere in that home) were identified as belonging to her, as far as I'm aware.
Just coincidence wasn't it, blood on the walls, Joana never being seen again.
She's alive & out there isn't she!
Just coincidence wasn't it, blood on the walls, Joana never being seen again.
She's alive & out there isn't she!
There were only 4 jury members, btw, with no evidence of a bias selection test. There were lynch mobs in front of the court house during one hearing, thanks to media speculation, fuelled by PJ "leaks". There was no countering expertise offered and so they didn't have much to go on.
The court heard the evidence which 40 some odd witnesses gave, including a taped confession from her uncle that the pair of them had bashed err up & she hit her head on the wall & he chopped her into bits.
That evidence.
That's your opinion, but it's still not clear what evidence, if any, you are basing your judgement on.
The court heard the evidence which 40 some odd witnesses gave, including a taped confession from her uncle that the pair of them had bashed err up & she hit her head on the wall & he chopped her into bits.
That evidence.
That's your opinion, but it's still not clear what evidence, if any, you are basing your judgement on.
There was more than enough time to murder Joana and conceal her small body in the waste ground out back. Also time for Leonor to do an initial clean up of blood spatter while João went to Celias on the pretence of looking for Joana. This was the story that Leonor originally told detectives. It was a simple matter then in the dead of night to move her remains and dispose of them.
Wasn't it the next day that Leonor bought the chemicals which she used to cleanse the house of any traces of what they had done. Unfortunately for her she missed the tiniest trace of blood on the wall by the outside door and on a slipper hidden under the settee. Remind me, when was it Leonor and João were seen carrying something away from the house in a bag?
If you have decided and believe that you already know what happened to these children, why do you persist in trying to deter others from researching and discussing the evidence, or lack of evidence, concerning, the McCann case and Cipriano?
What do you hope to achieve from your arguments about a case, that you have obviously not researched, but have made your mind up about anyway?
It’s all a bit pointless in my mind unless it is meant to cause a heated argument………………I know some people are like that. Strange!
As for Joao…….What do you think would eventually force him to confess??????????
Leonor was forced to confess!
Stupidity and ignorance should have been directed at those who believe what they say happened, must be what happened and is the only possibility………..without a shred of evidence and find it unnecessary to research and find the possibilities of truth and lies, as others are trying to do.
Do you believe anything? You didn’t believe Chloe was abducted either IIRC
Do not expect any further response to your posts as you are on Ignore list
Amazing isn't it, only Mccann supporters believe Joana was abducted, sadie has her doubts though, but she won't say what else she thinks might have happened to her.
I beg your pardon, Spammy.
Sadie strongly believes that Joana was abducted and has NEVER said anythiing else
Do not put words in my mouth. This is the second time in the past week that people on here have put words in my mouth. Words that I did not say. Words that are the opposite to my thoughts.
Just stop it.
Now you are making it up Sadie. Leonor was living at home each night up until her arrest and initial confession. Had there been any coercion we would have certainly heard about it.
Why ever not, he liked dishing it out. The PJ knew only too well that there was only one language known to João Cipriano, the language of violence.
so you expect us to believe that Leonor confessed to the murder but not to where she hid the body...she confessed to the murder having been beaten but couldn't tell them where the body was because she didn't know