The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!

[Anna]

That's nothing but a biased assumption, given that you only have press reports to go on.

I believe that the court proceeding as reported by the Media ,has to be correct.

[Anna]

I have written all about this case and if there was a private section that was locked until I finished, so that you could read from start to finish and then decide. I might consider posting it. Interested?

[Wonderfulspam]

Well there certainly wasn't any evidence presented to the Court, other than what The PJ thought might have happened.

Again, unless you were there, that's according to what you've read, in the media, that same media which you don't trust.

[Eleanor]

Again, unless you were there, that's according to what you've read, in the media, that same media which you don't trust.

I read The Court Transcript.

[Eleanor]

I have written all about this case and if there was a private section that was locked until I finished, so that you could read from start to finish and then decide. I might consider posting it. Interested?

Yes.

[Wonderfulspam]

I read The Court Transcript.

What, all of it?

Where can that be found then?

[Anna]

What, all of it?

Where can that be found then?

I don't have the 2005 transcript which as I have said was in the press and had to be correct.

This is the
2006 retrial/tribunal

http://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814/bfaf1cea93ab75fb8025716200388d89?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,cipriano

[Wonderfulspam]

I don't have the 2005 transcript which as I have said was in the press and had to be correct.

This is the
2006 retrial/tribunal

http://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814/bfaf1cea93ab75fb8025716200388d89?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,cipriano

In Portuguese, as one would expect, I imagine that's a translation headache.

[Carana]

I don't have the 2005 transcript which as I have said was in the press and had to be correct.

This is the
2006 retrial/tribunal

http://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814/bfaf1cea93ab75fb8025716200388d89?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,cipriano

Yes, that's the same one that I'd attempted to wade through.

Some of it was translated, but a large number of witness statements weren't: the neutral-to-positive ones.

ETA: Correction - the missing translations seem to be from the 2009 ruling.

[Anna]

Yes, that's the same one that I'd attempted to wade through.

Some of it was translated, but a large number of witness statements weren't: the neutral-to-positive ones.

which ones Carana, can you remember?

[Carana]

which ones Carana, can you remember?

I haven't checked back to the earlier one. The missing statements are from:

Supreme Court of Justice - 'Joana case' ruling - Part II
13 July 2009

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2977.msg106536#msg106536

[Anna]

I haven't checked back to the earlier one. The missing statements are from:

Supreme Court of Justice - 'Joana case' ruling - Part II
13 July 2009

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2977.msg106536#msg106536

Is this the same one Carana. below.
 I believe it was only the statements that had been updated that were shown, but I have Leandro's don't know about the others until I check out all those letters to see who they are.

http://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814/67e9f860c06af1d9802576a9004e4a2c?OpenDocument

[Wonderfulspam]

Yes, that's the same one that I'd attempted to wade through.

Some of it was translated, but a large number of witness statements weren't: the neutral-to-positive ones.

ETA: Correction - the missing translations seem to be from the 2009 ruling.

No doubt there were some glowing character references of the man who left another blind & the woman who couldn't be bothered to walk her daughter to school.

[Carana]

No doubt there were some glowing character references of the man who left another blind & the woman who couldn't be bothered to walk her daughter to school.

I'd agree that João doesn't come across as everyone's dream son-in-law, but I haven't found any trace of the legal ruling in the assault case which landed him in jail, so I don't know what evidence his conviction was based on. Several members of the family said that he took drugs (but Leandro said that he believed he smoked hash / pot, not anything injectable). He had very little education and found it hard to find work, but his employer (past or contemporaneous?) said that he worked well and didn't have any problems with him.

Leandro stated that João was fond of his niece, but that he wouldn't have put it past him to have attempted to sell her, but didn't believe that he would have harmed her.

Regarding Leonor and the school issue, the only account of that (to double-check) is a written statement from the supermarket lady. Leandro and the rest of his family found that she paid unusual attention to Joana and wondered whether she could have taken her. That may, of course, simply be wishful thinking as it would seem to be the only potential "princess" scenario.

[John]

Only a policeman knows what goes on in the real world, the belief that such things never occur in the UK is false I'm afraid.

To put the Leonor Cipriano torture into perspective, it was more of a mild beating with a cardboard roll than a torture.  You have to understand the circumstances to fully comprehend why several detectives put themselves in that position.

A youngster was missing and a mother and uncle were admitting to foul play but refusing to say where she was located or at least were giving false indications. 

Do you not think that in those circumstances something needed to be done quickly in order to have any chance of finding her dead or alive?  It was a case of do something and do it quickly.

Was a child's life not worth a few bruises?