Did the PJ do a reconstitution after Joana Cipriano disappeared?

[John]

I was originally replying to one of your posts.

I'm not taking much notice of the new (unsubstantiated) "confessions" in the torture trial. I accept that she was tortured while in PJ custody and that she couldn't identify who the officers were. So did the the court and the PJ disciplinary unit way before the trial.

Beyond that, I have doubts... Correia admitted that he'd tricked João into signing a confession note with some strange story that nasty people were going to murder him if he didn't. Or something.

I don't know whether Leonor's confession was spontaneous or whether someone advised her to invent a story in the hope of reducing her sentence to roughly the term she'd already served. As her lawyer, Correia should have known that the court wouldn't accept these new "confessions" anyway, and should have advised her against it, so I've no idea what he was playing at.

I notice you are undecided still as to Leonor's guilt Carana, surely she couldn't possibly be innocent given her various claims and statements?



Shortly after Joana's disappearance Leonor Cipriano pictured with one of her
younger children holds up a poster of the missing girl for the benefit of the Press.

[Carana]

I notice you are undecided still as to Leonor's guilt Carana, surely she couldn't possibly be innocent given her various claims and statements?



Shortly after Joana's disappearance Leonor Cipriano pictured with one of her
younger children holds up a poster of the missing girl for the benefit of the Press.

When I first heard of the case, I assumed that it was one of these awful child abuse sagas. It wasn't until I started reading more about PJ heavy-handed interrogation techniques that I began to wonder.

The translated parts of the Supreme Court ruling are all the negative bits, but then I stumbled across the original. There were numerous neutral to positive statements, which I hadn't seen before. No one had ever heard her even raise her voice at the child, let alone whack her.

Then, when I had a look at the summary of the forensics and the associated witness statements, I was gobsmacked. There is just nothing indicative of anything more than what would be found in any household.

It's not just that there is room for reasonable doubt, I find it to be the other way around: the possibility that the alleged events actually happened as described isn't even really plausible.

[John]

When I first heard of the case, I assumed that it was one of these awful child abuse sagas. It wasn't until I started reading more about PJ heavy-handed interrogation techniques that I began to wonder.

The translated parts of the Supreme Court ruling are all the negative bits, but then I stumbled across the original. There were numerous neutral to positive statements, which I hadn't seen before. No one had ever heard her even raise her voice at the child, let alone whack her.

Then, when I had a look at the summary of the forensics and the associated witness statements, I was gobsmacked. There just just nothing indicative of anything more than what would be found in any household.

It's not just that there is room for reasonable doubt, I find it to be the other way around: the possibility that the alleged events actually happened as described isn't even really plausible.

So you think Leonor's brother, who previously served a sentence for attempted murder, incapable of hurting the girl?  Could it be that Leonor covered for him in the beginning knowing that should he be convicted of assault again that they might lock him up and throw away the key?

I agree that there is no record of violence by Leonor, just a history of abandonment and neglect of her children.

[Carana]

So you think Leonor's brother, who previously served a sentence for attempted murder, incapable of hurting the girl?  Could it be that Leonor covered for him in the beginning knowing that should he be convicted of assault again that they might lock him up and throw away the key?

I agree that there is no record of violence by Leonor, just a history of abandonment and neglect of her children.

I'd thought about that possibility, but it doesn't seem as if anyone was particularly close to João, whereas - by all accounts - she was attached to Joana. I don't see any reason for her to cover up for him. And it still wouldn't explain why she'd have condoned, let alone actively participated in, this whole macabre chopping up scenario (for which there is zero forensic evidence).

[Carana]

So you think Leonor's brother, who previously served a sentence for attempted murder, incapable of hurting the girl?  Could it be that Leonor covered for him in the beginning knowing that should he be convicted of assault again that they might lock him up and throw away the key?

I agree that there is no record of violence by Leonor, just a history of abandonment and neglect of her children.

I'm not sure about neglect, but, yes, she'd left her other children with relatives of the fathers' families. Don't forget, however, that she'd had only three years of schooling and no means of supporting herself and various children. There doesn't appear to have been any investigation as to whether there had been domestic violence in those households or not... so there's no way of knowing why she left.

Her life became more settled when she met Leandro and they appear to have been happy together.

[John]

I'm not sure about neglect, but, yes, she'd left her other children with relatives of the fathers' families. Don't forget, however, that she'd had only three years of schooling and no means of supporting herself and various children. There doesn't appear to have been any investigation as to whether there had been domestic violence in those households or not... so there's no way of knowing why she left.

Her life became more settled when she met Leandro and they appear to have been happy together.

Leandro Silva brought some normality to the family and gave them a proper home instead of a tented hovel.



Happier times.  Leonor Cipriano with daughter Joana and then partner Leandro Silva




From left.  Joana Cipriano with her mother Leonor.  Far right.  Leandro Silva with his mother and sister seated.

[Carana]

Yes, they seem to have been a stable and happy - albeit poor -  little family.

The alleged scenario that she bashed Joana against the wall because she was having a quickie with her brother doesn't seem likely.

- They don't appear to have been close. He seems to have had a habit of turning up on relatives' doorsteps when he didn't have a job.

- I don't see why she would have had consensual sex in the living room in the potential presence of two young children, an older child about to come home from an errand, and one or both men who could have turned up home at any moment.

If that had happened, she could have said that he raped her. The brother already had a conviction (whatever the evidence may have been for that conviction...), so that doesn't make much sense. And there was no forensic evidence that that ever happened. If the PJ had found an incriminating used condom, that scenario might have been vaguely plausible.

- The other scenario was that the child got home and refused to hand over the change as she wanted to keep it to go to the festival, whereupon Leonor bashed her to near death and the subsequent coverup. But none of the witnesses had ever noticed Leonor being abusive to the child in any way. I can't see any reason to have physically attacked her for a few euros in change, particularly when the bolos shop said he seemed to recollect that Leonor had paid with a €20  note.

And again, whatever the unsubstantiated motive, there is no forensic evidence to support the actual alleged crime, nor the alleged incestual sex scenario.

[Anna]

Naquela unidade de saúde as hemorragias e dores abdominais provocadas por “alegadas lesões internas” resultantes das ditas agressões policiais de que disse ter sido vítima, foram desmascaradas pelos exames médicos:as manchas de sangue detectadas na cadeira onde se sentara nessa tarde, eram simplesmente vestígios do fluxo menstrual.


Erm... this is CdaM after all. She was taken to hospital complaining of alleged internal lesions due to police conduct, but medical examinations showed that the seat she'd been on simply showed traces of menstrual flow.

Really? Do interrogation chairs normally get taken to hospital for medical analysis?




Note to self: The dates need to be worked out. She was taken to Faro on the Monday (supposedly), but when was the interrogation that led to this initial supposed confession? It's feasible that the pain got progressively worse and was taken a day or two later. Or are the dates wrong in the article?

Where is there any mention of the medical report on that in the ruling?

No mention anywhere of that hospital visit, Carana. Only by Media.

 Well of course!…. you take the chair to the hospital with you if you were bleeding
and in pain.    No way!

 If it was on the chair it would also be on her clothing, which I assume the doctor would have removed to examine her? So why the need to examine a chair………Too Silly!
Just another excuse for an injury received whilst being interrogated IMO.
What big brave boys they were…………….
A woman who was very immature, backward and incapable of making decisions. Probably dependant on others for help in all manners of everyday life. A gentle person who could not even punish her children or joint a chicken.


Well we know that the reconstruction date could not have been after the date on the article in DN, so the book written by PC was quoting the date of the reconstruction as to questioning the witness and neighbours. The Joao reconstruction was on a Saturday, so would lawyers etc be so easily available? Leandro was there that day as he had to take the key the officers. Maybe he told the media?
 It certainly seems to be getting covered up for some reason.

Who knows about the date of the battering that Leonor got, except for the prison manager and media report?

Her partner and his  family and her brothers were all defendants, 6 in all I believe, but they all became witness just before the court case, most gave evidence against her. For example Leandro said she wasn't bruised and he had a knife and saw which had disappeared, which he later admitted that he never owned.

 
As for that food in the house. Leandro said that he had already stocked up with these products. (but he said a lot of things in the first court hearing which he later denied)

Why did Leonor send Joana out shopping if such things were already in the house?
I had come to the conclusion that Joao was being abusive due to his need for drug money and Leonor was protecting her by sending her out, but I could be wrong and the selling her story was true.


Was a receipt ever found for that shopping? The receipt was found for the cleaning materials and scourer.............Dated Several days after Joana's disappearance. Leandro's mother sent out for oil because there was an infestation of ticks? in the house and I believe that she done the cleaning.


The dates for the confession of an accident, seem to differ in the media...............If I go by the news articles it would appear that it was the early hours 24/25 when an accidental death was confessed to by Leonor However when it came to putting it in writing, her brother declined and blamed his sister.
She was further interrogated that day and I believe returned to the court, before being taken to an isolated cell in prison.
Joao was let free, but ran off and was caught.

(Sound familiar?...If you will  Confess to accident you will get a lesser sentence).

So it was at some time that same day 25th that the Reconstruction done by Joao was filmed. ? Before the confession of Leonor or after?

The times are so conflicting in Media articles and it seems they were not included in the Re-trial in 2006.



The 2009 appeal was the only free from interrogation, confession that Leonor made that I am aware of. I think the appeal was an idea put forward by the lawyer, . to get an early release, or she was actually telling  the truth.
Leonor had already tried to tell this story …… but who knows.
It was thrown out of court anyway.

[John]

I agree with most of what you posted Anna, I wonder if Joana was sent out to a shop on the other side of the village to get her out of the way for a while but she came back too quick?

Both João and Leonor were involved in the girls demise for one reason or another.   They were both in the house when the girl returned home, each blamed the other at different junctures.

João has already been out a couple of times on escorted home leave and Leonor will be doing the same in the near future.  I am confident we haven't heard the last of it from Leonor, maybe the truth will out yet.

[Carana]

For the moment, I'm going with Helena Machado's research that the reconstruction took place on 7 October. She's a well-known sociologist and I have no reason to believe that she wouldn't have checked the facts, even if it was a detail.

[mercury]

Then, when I had a look at the summary of the forensics and the associated witness statements, I was gobsmacked. There is just nothing indicative of anything more than what would be found in any household.

What like blood everywhere and semen in kids nickers? Sure

[Carana]

I agree with most of what you posted Anna, I wonder if Joana was sent out to a shop on the other side of the village to get her out of the way for a while but she came back too quick?

Both João and Leonor were involved in the girls demise for one reason or another.   They were both in the house when the girl returned home, each blamed the other at different junctures.

João has already been out a couple of times on escorted home leave and Leonor will be doing the same in the near future.  I am confident we haven't heard the last of it from Leonor, maybe the truth will out yet.

If she'd gone elsewhere, why would Celia have corroborated that she'd been there, unless she'd also been sent elsewhere for something else. What other shop would have been open? Did the PJ investigate? If so, there doesn't appear to be anything about this other errand in the SC ruling.

[John]

If she'd gone elsewhere, why would Celia have corroborated that she'd been there, unless she'd also been sent elsewhere for something else. What other shop would have been open? Did the PJ investigate? If so, there doesn't appear to be anything about this other errand in the SC ruling.

She only shopped in Célia's cafe/patisserie to my knowledge which is in the other side of the village from the family home. 

See map and link below.  A = Célia's    B = Cipriano home

www.miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3035.msg109971#msg109971

[Carana]

What like blood everywhere and semen in kids nickers? Sure

What blood everywhere? There were a few specks here and there, 10 days after she'd disappeared and none of it identifiable. Some of it was animal blood.

The semen in knickers issue is a bit odd. That issue never seems to have been clarified. The only thing that I found ages ago , but which I've now lost track of, was an alleged pair of knickers in a laundry basket of other clothes.

Leandro was asked about that in his interview and it seems he never understood what it was about, either. He was apparently told that it was his, then that of the other male occupant, then it might have been that of someone else.

Was there even a positive test for semen in the first place? The PJ forensic lot had managed to confuse semen with saliva in a later case so...
No idea...

[Carana]

She only shopped in Célia's cafe/patisserie to my knowledge which is in the other side of the village from the family home.

That's my understanding as well. Was any nearer shop open? If not, I don't see the potential issue.