Author Topic: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.  (Read 7004 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pathfinder73

Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« on: May 05, 2014, 01:37:07 PM »
NOTICE : This morning at 10am, Stephen D. Birch received a registered letter containing papers from Portugals Ministerio da Justica in which both the state and Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat and Jenifer Na Murat are suing Stephen for tresspassing and the state is suing Stephen for unlawfully conducting an investigation under article 57 & 58 section 2,3 and 4 of the penal act... (In July 2012, Stephen entered Robert Murats property and discovered what he believes to be Madeleine McCann remains buried beneath Roberts Murats rear gravel driveway)

https://www.facebook.com/diggingformadeleinmccann?fref=ts

I'm not surprised LOL  8-)(--)

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF8&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://expresso.sapo.pt/mp-acusa-sul-africano-que-diz-ter-encontrado-os-restos-de-maddie%3Df869772&sandbox=0&usg=ALkJrhib1wRHbQqhaRietCSOc9E9b-k6wQ
« Last Edit: June 21, 2014, 01:10:54 AM by John »
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #1 on: May 05, 2014, 01:46:10 PM »
NOTICE : This morning at 10am, Stephen D. Birch received a registered letter containing papers from Portugals Ministerio da Justica in which both the state and Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat and Jenifer Na Murat are suing Stephen for tresspassing and the state is suing Stephen for unlawfully conducting an investigation under article 57 & 58 section 2,3 and 4 of the penal act... (In July 2012, Stephen entered Robert Murats property and discovered what he believes to be Madeleine McCann remains buried beneath Roberts Murats rear gravel driveway)

https://www.facebook.com/diggingformadeleinmccann?fref=ts

I'm not surprised LOL  8-)(--)

All he did was try to find Maddie & this is what he gets in return.

It's a stitch up.

This proves beyond a shadow of doubt that she is buried there IMO.

I stand with Putin. Glory to Mother Putin.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #2 on: May 05, 2014, 01:48:18 PM »
All he did was try to find Maddie & this is what he gets in return.

It's a stitch up.

This proves beyond a shadow of doubt that she is buried there IMO.

Then you are very easily fooled

Alfred R Jones

  • Guest
Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #3 on: May 05, 2014, 02:08:56 PM »
NOTICE : This morning at 10am, Stephen D. Birch received a registered letter containing papers from Portugals Ministerio da Justica in which both the state and Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat and Jenifer Na Murat are suing Stephen for tresspassing and the state is suing Stephen for unlawfully conducting an investigation under article 57 & 58 section 2,3 and 4 of the penal act... (In July 2012, Stephen entered Robert Murats property and discovered what he believes to be Madeleine McCann remains buried beneath Roberts Murats rear gravel driveway)

https://www.facebook.com/diggingformadeleinmccann?fref=ts

I'm not surprised LOL  8-)(--)
About time too (if it's true - the man is a complete fantasist after all).
« Last Edit: May 05, 2014, 02:15:55 PM by Alfred R Jones »

Offline John

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #4 on: May 05, 2014, 07:07:34 PM »
The covering letters appear to be from the Lagos Public Prosecution Service and constitute the formalities under which the notice is served.  Mr Birch has twenty days to respond to the notice and advised that following a successful prosecution may be liable for the fees unless he secures Legal Aid.



« Last Edit: May 05, 2014, 08:41:31 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #5 on: May 05, 2014, 09:05:28 PM »
Given the threats by Birch in January to inform all the residents of the region of his theory in relation to Madeleine's remains and where he insists they lie, I am not in the least surprised that it has come to this.  Birch must realise that he cannot coerce Robert and Jenny Murat into allowing him access to dig up their driveway.

https://m.facebook.com/diggingformadeleinmccann/photos/a.216699198493115.1073741849.205966349566400/257779967718371/?type=1&refid=17
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline misty

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #6 on: May 06, 2014, 12:31:46 AM »
Having looked at articles 57 & 58 of the penal code I am a little lost as to how they apply in this instance.
I have read that there is no specific trespass law in Portugal. unless something is fenced in by a wall/hedge/fence exceeding 1.2m in height. Murat's rear driveway does not seem to fall within that criteria (indeed, he is quoted as saying along the lines that anyone could have had access to his property & buried a body - or  - how did Birch carry out these tests without our dogs alerting, where is the proof?).
Is this really an act by the local PJ to prevent SY examining the Murat drive on some obscure grounds?

Offline pegasus

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #7 on: May 06, 2014, 01:23:21 AM »
... I am not in the least surprised that it has come to this...
IMO it was a deluded and nasty thing to do by this amateur detective and he deserves prosecution.
UK experts already in 2007 stripped all the plants, scanned with ground penetrating radar, probed, searched tanks, and deployed a cadaver dog, two whole days of searching, and the entire property was proven to be 100% clean.
I would support RM 100% in prosecuting this guy.

Offline a.baker

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #8 on: May 06, 2014, 04:31:49 PM »
When exactly did RM lay the driveway that is in question? I presume it was before his property was searched by police?

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #9 on: May 06, 2014, 05:00:47 PM »
When exactly did RM lay the driveway that is in question? I presume it was before his property was searched by police?

After IIRC
I stand with Putin. Glory to Mother Putin.

Offline Angelo222

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #10 on: June 08, 2014, 01:16:13 PM »
NOTICE : This morning at 10am, Stephen D. Birch received a registered letter containing papers from Portugals Ministerio da Justica in which both the state and Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat and Jenifer Na Murat are suing Stephen for tresspassing and the state is suing Stephen for unlawfully conducting an investigation under article 57 & 58 section 2,3 and 4 of the penal act... (In July 2012, Stephen entered Robert Murats property and discovered what he believes to be Madeleine McCann remains buried beneath Roberts Murats rear gravel driveway)

https://www.facebook.com/diggingformadeleinmccann?fref=ts

I'm not surprised LOL  8-)(--)



Birch might get more than he bargained on if the PJ launch a criminal inquiry into his activities on Portuguese soil.  Who knows. the McCanns involvement in those same illegal activities could well attract criminal prosecutions.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF8&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://expresso.sapo.pt/mp-acusa-sul-africano-que-diz-ter-encontrado-os-restos-de-maddie%3Df869772&sandbox=0&usg=ALkJrhib1wRHbQqhaRietCSOc9E9b-k6wQ
« Last Edit: June 08, 2014, 11:54:10 PM by John »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Alfred R Jones

  • Guest
Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #11 on: June 08, 2014, 01:27:12 PM »
Unlikely.  The McCanns are protected by the "High-Ups", remember?

Offline Carana

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #12 on: June 10, 2014, 09:10:55 AM »
Having looked at articles 57 & 58 of the penal code I am a little lost as to how they apply in this instance.
I have read that there is no specific trespass law in Portugal. unless something is fenced in by a wall/hedge/fence exceeding 1.2m in height. Murat's rear driveway does not seem to fall within that criteria (indeed, he is quoted as saying along the lines that anyone could have had access to his property & buried a body - or  - how did Birch carry out these tests without our dogs alerting, where is the proof?).
Is this really an act by the local PJ to prevent SY examining the Murat drive on some obscure grounds?


57 seems to be about when the sentence can be declared extinct and 58 is about community service sentence.

ETA: Birch's site got that mixed up as well. 57 and 58 don't refer to the penal code, but to the penal procedure code. The statutes in question relate to arguidoship, which makes more sense than getting Birch over for a spot of community service.

Artigo 57.º
(Qualidade de arguido)
1 - Assume a qualidade de arguido todo aquele contra quem for deduzida acusação ou requerida instrução num processo penal.
2 - A qualidade de arguido conserva­se durante todo o decurso do processo.
3 - É correspondentemente aplicável o disposto nos n.ºs 2, 3 e 4 do artigo seguinte.
 
Artigo 58.º
(Constituição de arguido)
1 - Sem prejuízo do disposto no artigo anterior, é obrigatória a constituição de arguido logo que:
a) Correndo inquérito contra pessoa determinada, esta prestar declarações perante qualquer autoridade judiciária ou órgão de polícia criminal;
b) Tenha de ser aplicada a qualquer pessoa uma medida de coacção ou de garantia patrimonial;
c) Um suspeito for detido, nos termos e para os efeitos previstos nos artigos 254.º a 261.º; ou
d) For levantado auto de notícia que dê uma pessoa como agente de um crime e aquele lhe for comunicado.
2 - A constituição de arguido opera­se através da comunicação, oral ou por escrito, feita ao visado por uma autoridade judiciária ou um órgão de polícia criminal, de que a partir desse momento aquele deve considerar­se arguido num processo penal e da indicação e, se necessário, explicação dos direitos e deveres processuais referidos no artigo 61.º que por essa razão passam a caber­lhe.
3 - A constituição de arguido implica a entrega, sempre que possível no próprio acto, de documento de que constem a identificação do processo e do defensor, se este tiver sido nomeado, e os direitos e deveres processuais referidos no artigo 61.º.
4 - A omissão ou violação das formalidades previstas nos números anteriores implica que as declarações prestadas pela pessoa visada não podem ser utilizadas como prova contra ela.
 http://paulosantos-adv.planetaclix.pt/CPP.htm


The trespassing one would seem to be this, I think:
Artigo 191.o
Introdução em lugar vedado ao público
Quem, sem consentimento ou autorização de quem de direito, entrar ou permanecer em pátios, jardins ou espaços vedados anexos a habitação, em barcos ou outros meios de transporte, em lugar vedado e destinado a serviço ou a empresa públicos, a serviço de transporte ou ao exercício de profissões ou actividades, ou em qualquer outro lugar vedado e não livremente acessível ao público, é punido com pena de prisão até 3 meses ou com pena de multa até 60 dias.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2014, 04:56:03 PM by Carana »

Offline Carana

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #13 on: June 10, 2014, 09:20:03 AM »
Birch might get more than he bargained on if the PJ launch a criminal inquiry into his activities on Portuguese soil.  Who knows. the McCanns involvement in those same illegal activities could well attract criminal prosecutions.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF8&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://expresso.sapo.pt/mp-acusa-sul-africano-que-diz-ter-encontrado-os-restos-de-maddie%3Df869772&sandbox=0&usg=ALkJrhib1wRHbQqhaRietCSOc9E9b-k6wQ

Did the McCanns trespass on private property?

Offline Carana

Re: Stephen Birch is sued by Murats for trespass.
« Reply #14 on: June 10, 2014, 09:22:37 AM »
He's just charged with trespassing as that's the actual law that he violated.

NOTICE: English translation

Legal proceedings Robert Murat versus Stephen D. Birch

Trespassing - MADELEINE MCCANN

PUBLIC MINISTRY SERVICES IN LAGOS
SUPPORT UNIT
Av. dos Descobrimentos – 8601-852 Lagos
Telef: 282092170 Fax: 282092198 Mail: mp.lagos.tc@tribunais.org.pt
Exmo Senhor
Stephen Birch
8 Tierberg Rd, Oostersee, Parow, 7500
P O Box 21317
África do Sul
Case: 5/13/1TALGS Dispute Our Ref: 3155854
Date: 21-03-2014

Subject: Notification by Registered Letter with Acknowledgement of Receipt

Hereby notified as Accused, as provided in and for the purposes:
That, in accordance with Articles 57º and 58º, no.2, 3 and 4 of the Penal
Code, assumes the quality of Accused, the accusation being leveled is
according to the rights and duties as expounded in Article 61º and subject to
the referred rule.
That the above mentioned Dispute, extracted in accordance with the terms
contained in Article 283º of the Penal Code, is granted a limit of TWENTY
DAYS, as explained in Article 287º of the same rule, and opens a formal
PROGRAMME OF PROCEEDINGS:
The request must be addressed to the Examining Judge, not subject to
formalities, containing a summary of reasons, of fact and law, of disagreement
regarding the dispute, as well as, in every such event, produce compelling
evidence, not hitherto considered in the Dispute, and of the facts, based on
the evidence submitted, that are expected to be proved.
There being no legal nor defence representative on record, but given that one
is compulsory under Article 64º, No.3 of the Penal Code, Dr Mónica Viegas, at
Rua Infante de Sagres, 11-2º, 8600, Lagos, has been appointed as the
Accused’s Defence.
Furthermore, the Accused is informed, that should the Accused be found
guilty, the Accused, shall be held liable for the Public Defender’s legal fees,
unless, in the interim, the Accused be granted legal support, at which time,
the appointed Public Defender may be substituted by another legal counsel,
as per that stipulated in – Article 64º, No.4, of the referred rule.
The application for legal representation, will not impede the conduct of
proceedings (Article 39º, No. 10 of Act 34/2004 of 29 July) and must be
tendered at any Social Security Customer Service Office.
(Article 22, No.1 of the same Act).
Attached photocopy of Charge Sheet.
We request that the response bear the document reference and Case number.
*Legal holidays span 22 December to 3 January; Palm Sunday to Easter
Monday and 16 July to 31 August.
The abovementioned periods are uninterrupted, suspended by the Legal
Holidays and recommence as from the third business day after postal register
(Article 113, No.2, Penal Code).*
In the case of an urgent process, the periods referred to above, shall not apply.
Should the period expire while court is closed, the period will be transferred to
the very next first business day.
Signed by the Assistant Officer of the Court, Vera Gabriel.
PUBLIC SERVICE MINISTRY IN LAGOS
SUPPORT UNIT
Av. dos Descobrimentos – 8601-852 Lagos
Telef: 282092170 Fax: 282092198 Mail: mp.lagos.tc@triubnais.org.pt
Case No: 5-13.1TALGS
3139733
CONCLUSION: -11-03-2014 (Sheets. 108).-
(Electronic document drawn by Assistant Officer of the Court, Vera Gabriel)
=CLS=
Sheets.108 and ss: Contents acknowledged
*
Hereby declare the investigation closed.
*
***
As provided from analysis of case files, all efforts made in the course of the present dispute to access to Stephen Donald Birch to notify same of the quality of Accused and of a subsequent investigation, proved fruitless.
Therefore, and there being no foreseeable beneficial endeavours, under that contained in Article 272º, No.1, of the Penal Code, the interrogation of the Accused is ultimately dispensed with.

According to that defined in Article 57º, No.1 of the Penal Code, the denounced thus accepts the charge order and assumes the quality of Accused. Be notified.
***
Under provisions of Article 64º, No.3 of the Penal Code, editorial brought about by Act No.48/2007, of 29 August, Public Defender, Dr Mónica Viegas, is appointed to Stephen Birch, as indicated by CDOA, and as per sheets 109.
The Accused and the Defence appointed are notified according to Article 66º, No.1 of the Penal Code.

***
The Public Ministry accuses, in common procedure, with the intervention of First Instance Court:
Stephen Donald Birch, born in South Africa, born on
20 April 1965, holder of Passport Number, A00571114 and
residing at 8 Tierberg Road, Oostersee, Parow, PO Box 21317,
South Africa.

1.On an unestablished date, but during the month of June and prior to 5 July
2012, the Accused, transgressed the residential gates of Jenifer Ann Murat,
Casa Liliana, Rua do Ramalhete, Vila Luz, Lagos, within this Council, entering
the property.

2.The land in question is self-contained, bordered by a 1.50m high boundary
wall, 2m high hedges and also by a wire fence, inaccessible to any outsider.

3.The Accused penetrated this area of land without prior consent and against
the will of the owner of the residence, the now ‘injured party’.

4.The Accused acted voluntarily and deliberately

5.knowing full well that this conduct was and is punishable by law.
In the light of the above, the Accused,Stephen Donald Birch, acted as sole and actualperpetrator, constituting a crime of trespassing on private property, governed by and punishable under Article 191º
of the Penal Code.

*
Indication by means of proof:
A. According to Witnesses
a) Jenifer Na Murat, id. sheet. 108;
b) Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, id. sheet. 31.
B. According to Documents
a) Photographs, sheets. 7 to 11;
b) Newspaper Clippings, sheets. 12 to 14.
*
In accordance with Article 277º, No.3 ex vi of Article 283º, No.5, both under the Penal Code, as reflected and in accordance with Article 287º, No.1, paragraph a) of the same law, wording in force under DL No. 320-C/00, of 15
December, notifying the Accused as well as the Public Defender (a) appointed
(a), Complainant and their Legal Representative of the preceding charge.
*
Procedural Position of the Accused:
Not occurring in casu of the situations to which Article 204º of the Penal Code,
it is declared that the Accused, when located, be subjected to verifying identity and residence and await proceedings post case, subject to enforced measures of constraint.

***
Processed and Reviewed.
Lagos, 18 March 2014
Assistant Prosecutor
Maria Pinto de Almeida
https://www.facebook.com/diggingformadeleinmccann?fref=ts