I aim this response at no-one in particular in this thread, but this seems a reasonable place to put it.
Do those of you who claim "unsafe conviction" about Leonor Cipriano (in varying degrees of hysteria) realise how hypocritical it is to be calling into question the Portuguese legal system and then in other threads hold us "[ censored word ]" up for ridicule as "two legal systems" have failed to charge the McCanns?
Basically what one/some of you are doing in here is saying, "I know better than the Portuguese system. This woman was tortured. This conviction is unsafe". Your assertions are as much speculation as those of us who doubt the McCann version of events in that where you feel Leonor is wrongly convicted, we feel that the McCanns are wrongly not (yet) charged. Both circumstances, of course, could change in the future, but as of right now, the Portuguese courts after multiple investigations has found Leonor guilty on more than one occasion and yet you still feel "you know better"...?
If you search on the internet about Leonor Cipriano you basically get hits from two main sources: McCann Pro sites and McCann Anti sites. The pro sites, without exception as far as I've found, are "pro" Cipriano too. You can understand why... to "prove" the conviction of the Ciprianos is unsafe/a miscarriage of justice is to prove that Amaral is a corrupt cop as far as they're concerned. This helps bolster their belief system that if Amaral is a corrupt cop as regards Cipriano, he must be a corrupt cop as far as the McCann case goes. This then allows by (their) logical extension (I've seen all the arguments) that to believe any of Amaral's words is a foolish endeavour and only us "stupid [ censored word ]" would do so.
On the other hand, in support of the conviction of the Ciprianos, I could bring in any number of reasoned posts from Joana Morais, Anna Andresse, Duarte Levy, etc. and they would be INSTANTLY dismissed on here by any McCann supporter as worthless simply because the origin is one that tends to be critical of the McCanns. This is classic "play the man and not the ball" tactics as used by supporters of the McCanns virtually everywhere. When unable to make headway in an argument, attack the poster/source. Discredit, discredit, discredit is the mantra. Discredit the dogs, discredit the dog handlers, discredit the police who doubt the McCanns, discredit those bloggers who don't support the McCanns... it goes on, but you get the idea.
Where is the "truth" to be found in the Cipriano case? With those (pro boards and blogs) who have a vested interest in making the portuguese legal system to be a farce and Amaral, in particular, to be corrupt or with the actual Portuguese system itself?
I've read countless bits of information on the Cipriano case. None of it seems independent and unbiased to me. I'd be very willing to read up on "unbiased" reports if anyone has any but until then, it's undeniable that Leonor Cipriano has been proven to be a liar on more than one occasion.