The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!

[stephen25000]

we don't know if Leonor is guilty or innocent...we do know that she has been found guilty by a court but how safe this conviction is we don't know....we do know that the idea that the FSS mixed dna with that of its technicians is a myth based on the fact that some people misunderstood the statement they made

She is a convicted murderer and that doesn't look like changing.

Meanwhile, by stating what you did, how do we know any convicted murderer is guilty ???

[Carana]

And, by the way, jury trials only happen in Portugal if the defendant requests it or agrees to it. As some mentioned they are very rare.

I'm glad that you now actually agree that there can be jury trials.
Back in October you'd said that they don't exist in Portugal.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2853.msg105424#msg105424

[Eleanor]

I'm glad that you now actually agree that there can be jury trials.
Back in October you'd said that they don't exist in Portugal.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2853.msg105424#msg105424

It was Luz who told me that one of the Judges vote Leonor Cipriano Not Guilty.

[Carana]

I'll answer Luz over here...

I don't know Carana and I am not going to discuss her/his skills. I said and reinforce, Carana is totally ignorant about the functioning of the Portuguese Legal System and doesn't know anything about the Cipriano case apart from what can be read in the net. Commenting on Cipriano is a way to attack Amaral and not a honest attempt to understand a case that in Portugal was resolved (not well, because people expected the murderers to have been convicted to 25 years) within what our law previews.

If you had read back just one page, I agreed with Lyall that in such cases the criticism shouldn't all be laid at the door of the police, but that lawyers and the judiciary also bear responsibility. My comment was actually defending the Portuguese who may be victims of miscarriages of justice.

Yes, of course, my understanding of the Cipriano case comes from what I've found on the Internet. I find the penal and penal process codes and the Supreme Court judgement more informative than the sensationalist press that largely relies on leaks and can hardly bite the hand that feeds them.

Which reminds me, while I'm at it, an official police press relations unit might be helpful. As one Portuguese tabloid journalist said (and I'm having to paraphrase as I don't have the quote to hand), judicial secrecy is like traffic lights, everyone knows they exist, but no one takes any notice. Without informal sources, or however he phrased it, there would be no crime journalism in Portugal. I presume he meant prior to court reporting, by which time it's too late for balanced reporting in the tabloids. Leaks or prejudicial information appears in the press in most countries, but an official press relations unit might offer a greater chance of more balanced reporting in the quality press.

[Carana]

It was Luz who told me that one of the Judges vote Leonor Cipriano Not Guilty.

On the Cipriano forum...

www.miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2977.msg128051#msg128051

[Carana]

Trying to help the mods... Again, I'll answer over here.

Here we go... I've put your contributions in bold.


The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann (3) from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugual on 3 May 2007. / Re: Was Gonçalo Amaral fair game given the content of his book?
« on: February 10, 2014, 10:57:03 PM »
Quote from: Carana on February 10, 2014, 01:39:42 PM

    I happen to agree with you on the bit that I underlined... i.e., "it's the lawyers and judiciary who should be sharing the criticism".

    In theory, a magistrate / investigating judge should have played an active role in directing the police work in the Joana case. However, possibly due to overload, did this actually happen in practice? In the Joana case, it seems to have been more of a rubber-stamping exercise, following a "confession" in dubious circumstances. Then, the obvious question back down to the police was... right, she's confessed, now find the body.

    How much time did the lawyers actually spend on analysing this case? What means did they have for expert opinions to counter the assertions made by the PJ?

    How easy would it have been for jury members (a relatively rare occurrence) to divorce themselves from all the tabloid "leaks" prior to the case? And who leaked them? How could they have objectively have assessed evidence in the absence of an effective defence? The recorded "reconstruction" presented on the last day of the 3-day trial, must have been quite shocking, but in line with the tabloid "leaks".

    It didn't seem to occur to anyone to question the validity of the so-called forensic evidence, nor the conditions under which Leonor and others were interrogated, leading to the initial "confession", let alone how João eventually signed on the dotted line that the reconstruction was "voluntary".



I'm afraid you are going too far on your appreciation about criminal cases in a country whose laws or justice system you do not know and, especially, about a case you totally have no information about.

Everything you say is totally  ... moderated ....  and it clearly displays a motivation behind it that has nothing to do with case itself but with attacking the PJ.


You have every reason to understand your own legal system far better than I could ever do, particularly in view of the language barrier.

A question, though... Why did you say, in October, that jury trials don't exist in Portugal?




Offline Carana

    Executive Member
    ******
    Posts: 2932
    Newbie
        View Profile
        Personal Message (Offline)

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #767 on: November 13, 2013, 03:35:40 PM »

    Quote
    Modify

@ Luz

Why did you say that there were no jury trials in Portugal? The possibility is even in your Constitution, Article 207.

Luz

Sr. Member
****
Posts: 866
Don't question me. It'll only make you look stupid
View Profile
Personal Message (Offline)
User is on moderator watch listw..ched

Re: Scientific Approach
« Reply #130 on: October 07, 2013, 01:51:40 PM »

Quote

Quote from: C.Edwards on October 07, 2013, 01:45:44 PM

You spend so much time scattering around irrelevancies and ducking and diving from questions that it's quite conceivable you can dive into your post history and find anything that supports whatever avenue of inconsequence you happen to currently be pootling along. You were clearly trying to make the point that Amaral was a convicted fraudster at the outset of the Madeleine investigation. This is a complete misrepresentation or shall we say, "davel-ism"?


A very US way of acting. When you have no defense create lies to denigrate the ones that have reached the truth.
In Portugal it doesn't work that way, we have no jury trials. When you are put before a judge or a set of 3 judges you are alone, and it doesn't matter how much dirty work your friends have done for you. You are naked before the Justice.

Yet...


Assistant Prosecutor, José Carlos Pinheiro, has arranged for several key prosecution witnesses to be summoned to court. These include António Leandro (stepfather of Joana), his mother Lurdes David, half-brother Carlos Alberto, Anabela Cipriano and Anatólio Duarte (sister and brother-in-law of Leonor and João Cipriano) and Nelson Cipriano, the defendants’ brother. Leonor Cipriano’s defence had sought to avoid a jury trial, fearing that jurors would be unduly influenced by intense media coverage. João Novais Pacheco, Leonor’s lawyer, said the defence’s objective had been to keep the indictment to one of ‘death by aggravated assault’, punishable by a sentence of between one and five years. This would have precluded a jury trial because juries only preside over cases where ultimate jail terms are equal to or greater than eight years.
http://www.algarveresident.com/8346-0/algarve/joana-accused-could-face-25-years


Portuguese Constitution
Article 207
(Juries, public participation and experts)
1. In such cases and with such composition as the law may lay down, and particularly
when either the prosecution or the defence so request, a jury may participate in the trial of serious crimes, save those involving terrorism or highly organised crime.

[John]

It was Luz who told me that one of the Judges vote Leonor Cipriano Not Guilty.

I understand that one judge didn't agree with the murder charge and the 20 year sentence associated with it.  It wasn't the fact that he thought her not guilty but felt her culpability was less than that on the indictment.  He felt a much lesser sentence was in order, less than 10 years.  In the end though Leonor had her sentenced reduced by the Supreme Court after the failed appeal. Her perjury conviction saw 7 months added some years later.

[sadie]

I am too tired at present to give the answer this deserves, but the fact that the Court judged
1)  on TORTURED OUT statements,

2)  that they took the word of  two PJ officers, the one of whom is allegedly about to stand trial on SEVEN very dirty deeds and the other is a convicted liar says oceans.  In fairness the Courts were not aware of this at the time.

3)  There were NO FORENSICS at all  ... moderated as false ...

4)  The Courts allowed a video of a man who "confessed"  to be played, when the man had pled innocence.  This man could have been deprived of his drugs then re-offered them if he did as told .... or tortured as the others, Leonor and Leandro were, to obtain it.  In any case I thought that such admissions were NOT allowed in PT Courts.  What happened here then?

5)  Their lawyer persuaded them to remain silent.  How could they defend themselves?
 
It turned out that their Lawyer had been found carrying drugs into a prison, but mysteriously appears to have been let off charges ... ermm  >@@(*&)  ... and also that their lawyer was a personal friend of Amaral, the inspector, who was the drugs Inspector for the area and who, with Cristavao, formed the bizarre Prosecution theory put to Court.

Lawyer to lead Inspectors relationship is a bit too cozy for my liking.

6)  The courts did not accept certain aspects of Amaral and Cristovaos theory, yet conveniently forgot that.

7)  The court refused evidence from, we are told, more people who were supportive or non commital of The Ciprianos than people that were against them.  Why was that?

8)  There was no body, nor forensically checked blood, nor any evidence of what happened to Joana

9)  Cristavao made mega bucks from the case and trial by writing a book about it.  Did he also get the heave ho?

10)  Propaganda via leaks destroyed any chance of a fair trial.

That will do for now.  I am sure there is plenty more that the analysts on this forum could add.
 

The fact that the judge ignored all the above and more, yet found both Leonor and Joao guilty says more about the PT Justice system than even you do, Luz

What forensics were there John?  I know of none

[sadie]

Good post Sadie - your following  point in particular seems to go against the Portuguese rules in court cases.  LC and her brother opted to say nothing during the trial.   By playing that tape that 'constitutional right' was completely ignored IMO.


Quote
4)  The Courts allowed a video of a man who "confessed"  to be played, when the man had pled innocence.  This man could have been deprived of his drugs then re-offered them if he did as told .... or tortured as the others, Leonor and Leandro were, to obtain it.  In any case I thought that such admissions were NOT allowed in PT Courts.  What happened here then?
Unquote


... the prosecution sought and received permission to play the tape recorded confession to the court ...

So they broke the rules in this case.  Why?  Why was that acceptable in this particular case, but not in others?

[sadie]

She is a convicted murderer and that doesn't look like changing.

Meanwhile, by stating what you did, how do we know any convicted murderer is guilty ???

All the rules for fair play and Jusice were broken in this case Stephen

To name just three:
1)  Tortured out so called "evidence" is NOT evidence at all
2)  Joaos video was allowed against him, when admissions were NOT permitted in Court and he had pled NOT GUILTY
3)  Disgusting propaganda was published by media all over PT before the trial, propaganda that painted Leonor and Joao in an unbelievably bad light.  A fair trial was virtually impossible after this.

[John]

All the rules for fair play and Jusice were broken in this case Stephen

To name just three:
1)  Tortured out so called "evidence" is NOT evidence at all
2)  Joaos video was allowed against him, when admissions were NOT permitted in Court and he had pled NOT GUILTY
3)  Disgusting propaganda was published by media all over PT before the trial, propaganda that painted Leonor and Joao in an unbelievably bad light.  A fair trial was virtually impossible after this.

João Cipriano was quite happy to take the PJ on at least twelve wild goose chases looking for Joana's remains.  Most of the media referred to him paying a game with the police, not the actions of a bereaved uncle but you go on believing the lying s..mbag.

His confession video was ALLOWED BY THE JUDGES as was THEIR RIGHT.  But again you think you know more than the learned Portuguese judges.

They are both guilty as hell.  As the senior judge stated, one of them couldn't have done the deed alone, they were both in on it.

[sadie]

João Cipriano was quite happy to take the PJ on at least twelve wild goose chases looking for Joana's remains.  Most of the media referred to him paying a game with the police, not the actions of a bereaved uncle but you go on believing the lying s..mbag.

Joao is painted as of low intellect and a drug addict.  Threaten him, or induce him with the offer of a drugs fix and he would be only too pleased to oblige.   We have no way of knowing if either of these things happened, but some funny things have happened with drugs in this case. 
1)  The lawyer in the Leonor case, whose name I cant remember, wasn't he found carrying drugs supposedly into prison? ..... yet as far as we know, he was never charged.

2)  Was it one of the Metodo 3 group that was also charged with carrying drugs?  That accusation undermined their veracity.  Was the charge genuine? ... or were they stopped looking ?

Do we know?   

His confession video was ALLOWED BY THE JUDGES as was THEIR RIGHT.  But again you think you know more than the learned Portuguese judges.

I am questioning them breaking the rules in THIS case John.  One rule for everyone else and another for the Ciprianos?  Jeez, seems you support that along with tortured out so called evidence?  And the tales of a criminal cop, who is a Court proven liar

They are both guilty as hell.  As the senior judge stated, one of them couldn't have done the deed alone, they were both in on it.

Your opinion, based on very little, if anything ... except for the fancy tale thought up by Amaral and Cristavao ! 

... moderated abuse ...    

[Eleanor]

Jaoa took them on a wild goose chase because he was afraid of being beaten again.  I would have thought that this was obvious.
Presuming that he had killed Joana, why would he not have told them where the body was?

So was it a trashed car?  Was it the pig pen.  Or was she buried on a hillside?

[Wonderfulspam]

Jaoa took them on a wild goose chase because he was afraid of being beaten again.  I would have thought that this was obvious.
Presuming that he had killed Joana, why would he not have told them where the body was?

So was it a trashed car?  Was it the pig pen.  Or was she buried on a hillside?

Pig pen, hillside, who knows? 

Either way the kid is dead & she can't RIP all the time she is used as a pawn by team mccann.
 

[Eleanor]

Pig pen, hillside, who knows? 

Either way the kid is dead & she can't RIP all the time she is used as a pawn by team mccann.

Wot, No Proof?  Now there's a surprise.