There is no comparison between prolonged sadistic abuse over many months/years - and a mother apparently murdering her daughter in a fit of anger because she was caught in an incestuous act. The court did not believe that happened - and no other motive was offered.
So with no motive and no forensic evidence to prove any of the claims made by the PJ and a 'confession' retracted on the grounds that she had been tortured - how on earth was this lady found guilty?
Furthermore since the torture of LC has been established in a Portuguese court of law and so nothing in her confession can be regarded as remotely credible let alone reliable - why is she still in prison?
SHOW me a link where she is NOT GUILTY of this heinous crime.
Please I will be very interested.
I find it quite abhorrent almost sickening that anyone would keep pushing this case to make a point about a supposed corrupt COPPER on another case of a child abducted a BRITISH child.
It actually physically makes me feel sick to my stomach that people will keep pushing this case not for justice of the little girl who was murdered and cut up into pieces, but to just make a POINT about Mr Amaral.IF Mr Amaral had not been involved in the Leonor Cipriano case you would not even be bothered with it?
People should be ashamed of themselves for using this case to sway others about another.
Without actually googling it can you name the child who was murdered by her mother and uncle? Do you know her age, how and when she went missing?
Do you actually know ANYTHING about this case PRIOR to Mr Amaral saying he thought the McCanns were implicit in their daughters case...can you actually tell me when she died? What year was it?
Its disgraceful this case keeps being dragged up.
It serves no purpose and I am surprised it is allowed to stand as it has nothing to do with the Maddy case nothing at all....
Just so that others can see this is the little girl who's mother and uncle killed and cut up because allegedly she saw them having incestuous sex...either way THEY killed her were responsible for her demise and were found guilty.
ALL the officers who were accused of beating her were found not guilty....
Its appalling really that she complained of being beaten by the police but was quite happy to do the same to her own daughter which resulted in her death.
Extracts from Supreme Court of Justice - ruling on the Homicide and concealment of eight-year-old Joana Cipriano's body, 20.04.2006ab) at a certain point in time, due to a motive that has not been exactly established, both arguidos started, conjointly, to successively hit minor CC on the head, prompting her to hit her head on the wall’s corner, being visible that she bled, from her mouth, her nose and her temple, due to the hits against the wall, which also caused the minor’s fall and her death, thus ceasing the arguidos’ activity;
ac) traces of blood from the minor remained on the living room’s walls and floor, on various spots, and also near the entrance;
ad) the arguidos ensured that CC was dead, verifying that she neither breathed nor reacted, and then, not wanting to be held responsible over their daughter’s and niece’s death, decided to prevent said death from becoming known to others;
ae) therefore, they soon decided that they would have to ensure that the existence of any signs in the house of what they had just done could not be verified, that the minor’s body would never be found and that, preferably, everyone would be convinced that the minor had been taken by a third party;
af) therefore, arguida BB remained at home, washing the wall and the floor that had signs of blood from CC, as well as the spot where the minor remained slumped after death, using a mop and its bucket to do so.
(...)
aah) the arguidos managed to disturb the investigative activities and prevented the mortal remains of minor CC, whose life they took, from being located;
aai) the aforementioned activities were carried out by the arguidos under concerted efforts and intentions, in a deliberate, free and conscious manner, fully knowing that those behaviours are punished by law;
aaj) therefore as far as taking the life of CC, their direct relative (daughter and niece), is concerned, which they did by employing force, taking advantage of the fact that she couldn’t defend herself (taking into account her age and physical built) and using force in the full knowledge that, considering the vital area in which her body was hit (the head) repeatedly and violently, prompting the minor’s head to hit the wall, they could take her life away from her, a consequence which they accepted, still not ceasing their activity;
aal) not seeing as an obstacle the circumstance that the minor depended on her mother and was a direct relative of both, and should be defended instead of victimised by them;
aam) in the same deliberate, free and conscious manner, and knowing that such behaviour is punishable, they carried out the above described action of cutting CC’s body, demonstrating total insensibility, knowing full well that, in this manner, they offended the communitarian respect that is due to the dead, acting with the purpose of CC’s body never being found again, hiding it in a location that is not appropriated for the effect, in order to try to avoid responsibility for her death;
