UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => The Disappearance of Portuguese youngster Joana Cipriano (8) from the village of Figueira, near Portimão, Algarve, on 12 September 2004. => Topic started by: C.Edwards on October 18, 2013, 09:24:16 AM
-
"truth about amaral" and "agendas"? Did they descend into name calling? The Amaral one was crossing into the bounds of straight up harassment of the poor bloke but aside from that seemed to be just about under control and was quite interesting as an expose (dunno how to do the accented "e"!) about how those that really don't like him feel!
I actually thought Icabod was making a good point about Dhingra too, if I'm honest.
-
"truth about amaral" and "agendas"? Did they descend into name calling? The Amaral one was crossing into the bounds of straight up harassment of the poor bloke but aside from that seemed to be just about under control and was quite interesting as an expose (dunno how to do the accented "e"!) about how those that really don't like him feel!
I actually thought Icabod was making a good point about Dhingra too, if I'm honest.
That's true, but those bitter threads/posts are vim consuming, imo.
-
"truth about amaral" and "agendas"? Did they descend into name calling? The Amaral one was crossing into the bounds of straight up harassment of the poor bloke but aside from that seemed to be just about under control and was quite interesting as an expose (dunno how to do the accented "e"!) about how those that really don't like him feel!
I actually thought Icabod was making a good point about Dhingra too, if I'm honest.
did you read the thread it was quite bizarre. serendipity posted something from the Amnesty website which he had obviously altered himself... but continued to deny it
-
did you read the thread it was quite bizarre. serendipity posted something from the Amnesty website which he had obviously altered himself... but continued to deny it
I clearly recall serendipity saying he'd added the red text himself. You were so busy being outraged that you didn't seem to notice, however. The point I think he was making was that Amnesty International used to have something on their site about the torture of Cipriano and that a part of it had been removed. I was tired so didn't take it all in properly at the time. In a nutshell she was found to have lied. Therefore other than a faintly ridiculous (for a given level of ridiculous, of course) legal system judging that even though Amaral did not lie in his document he kind of didn't know he wasn't lying at the time and therefore his suspended sentence remained, it's pretty much all over bar the shouting, isn't it?
I know that you still like to fling other accusations of wrongdoing at him but as there don't seem to be any non-Amaral-hating blogs/sites to back up these alleged other misdemeanours of his, I'll take them with a pinch of salt thanks. Feel free to provide me with links to prove your point, however, I'm not saying they don't exist, just that I can't find them.
-
I clearly recall serendipity saying he'd added the red text himself. You were so busy being outraged that you didn't seem to notice, however. The point I think he was making was that Amnesty International used to have something on their site about the torture of Cipriano and that a part of it had been removed. I was tired so didn't take it all in properly at the time. In a nutshell she was found to have lied. Therefore other than a faintly ridiculous (for a given level of ridiculous, of course) legal system judging that even though Amaral did not lie in his document he kind of didn't know he wasn't lying at the time and therefore his suspended sentence remained, it's pretty much all over bar the shouting, isn't it?
I know that you still like to fling other accusations of wrongdoing at him but as there don't seem to be any non-Amaral-hating blogs/sites to back up these alleged other misdemeanours of his, I'll take them with a pinch of salt thanks. Feel free to provide me with links to prove your point, however, I'm not saying they don't exist, just that I can't find them.
Serendipity certainly didn't admit to altering the report but as the evidence has been removed I can't show you-..You also have the second part wrong..nothing has been removed from the amnesty website..doesn't change anything...amaral remains a convicted criminal
-
I am sure serendipity will come on at some stage and repost...their post made sense to me. Just another poster being accused of doctoring etc etc
-
I am sure serendipity will come on at some stage and repost...their post made sense to me. Just another poster being accused of doctoring etc etc
as the post has been removed, nothing can be confirmed. perhaps serendipity would like to repost
-
Serendipity certainly didn't admit to altering the report but as the evidence has been removed I can't show you-..You also have the second part wrong..nothing has been removed from the amnesty website..doesn't change anything...a marl remains a convicted criminal
Yes, he did admit to adding the text. "I added it myself" were, I think, his direct words. I'm pretty sure that Serendipity was saying that there used to be a longer section on the Amnesty site which got removed.
The current Amnesty site is wrong as far as I can see. It still shows the "May 22nd" ruling as being current in some way when that is from 2009! In April this year, Cipriano was sentenced to 7 months more in jail for lying about being tortured. Amaral remains convicted of false testimony, which wasn't actually false testimony! Everyone but the ardent Amaral-bashers has accepted this and moved on.
-
Yes, he did admit to adding the text. "I added it myself" were, I think, his direct words. I'm pretty sure that Serendipity was saying that there used to be a longer section on the Amnesty site which got removed.
The current Amnesty site is wrong as far as I can see. It still shows the "May 22nd" ruling as being current in some way when that is from 2009! In April this year, Cipriano was sentenced to 7 months more in jail for lying about being tortured. Amaral remains convicted of false testimony, which wasn't actually false testimony! Everyone but the ardent Amaral-bashers has accepted this and moved on.
no he didn't admit to altering the text..in fact his behaviour is quite bizarre. As you have said and I agree with you..amaral remains convicted
-
Serendipity certainly didn't admit to altering the report but as the evidence has been removed I can't show you-..You also have the second part wrong..nothing has been removed from the amnesty website..doesn't change anything...amaral remains a convicted criminal
I clearly stated last night that I had taken screenshots of each of the available Amnesty International Reports for Portugal for the years 2009 to 2013 and had collated them into one screenshot as shown below. I then added my own text in red which clarified the point I was making which clearly explained the purpose of the screenshot.
Yours and others accusations last night that I have altered or falsified official documents are totally unwarranted and incorrect and I expect a full apology from you. :)
Here are the supportive links which are all referenced in the screenshot that was posted last night. Compare them all and you will clearly see that they are the same :)
2009 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2009
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2010 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2010
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2011 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2011
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2012 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2012
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
But lookee here at the 2013 report, there is no longer any reference to Goncalo Amaral or Leonor Cipriano under the heading 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2013
So Davel, why do think it is that there is now no mention of either Amaral or Cipriano in the 2013 report given that there has been in all of those years (2009 - 2012) since the original case came to court?
I'll tell you why, it is because in April 2013 Leonor Cipriano had a further 7 months added to her sentence for false testimony for lying about being tortured by the PJ. Therefore as she lied about it, Goncalo Amaral is no longer of interest regarding the Cipriano case as far as Amnesty International are concerned, hence no mention of the case in the current report.
Like I said last night, it is not rocket science :)
And now I am going out for the evening so I will be logging out and so will bid you adieu and look forward to catching up with you again :)
Oh and here is the screenshot that I posted last night :)
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3738/10335037565_7df58d6f75_b.jpg)
-
8((()*/
have a good night out S
-
I clearly stated last night that I had taken screenshots of each of the available Amnesty International Reports for Portugal for the years 2009 to 2013 and had collated them into one screenshot as shown below. I then added my own text in red which clarified the point I was making which clearly explained the purpose of the screenshot.
Yours and others accusations last night that I have altered or falsified official documents are totally unwarranted and incorrect and I expect a full apology from you. :)
Here are the supportive links which are all referenced in the screenshot that was posted last night. Compare them all and you will clearly see that they are the same :)
2009 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2009
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2010 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2010
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2011 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2011
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2012 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2012
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
But lookee here at the 2013 report, there is no longer any reference to Goncalo Amaral or Leonor Cipriano under the heading 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2013
So Davel, why do think it is that there is now no mention of either Amaral or Cipriano in the 2013 report given that there has been in all of those years (2009 - 2012) since the original case came to court?
I'll tell you why, it is because in April 2013 Leonor Cipriano had a further 7 months added to her sentence for false testimony for lying about being tortured by the PJ. Therefore as she lied about it, Goncalo Amaral is no longer of interest regarding the Cipriano case as far as Amnesty International are concerned, hence no mention of the case in the current report.
Like I said last night, it is not rocket science :)
And now I am going out for the evening so I will be logging out and so will bid you adieu and look forward to catching up with you again :)
Oh and here is the screenshot that I posted last night :)
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3738/10335037565_7df58d6f75_b.jpg)
8((()*/
Predicted Davel response: "doesn't matter, he's still a convicted criminal".
-
I clearly stated last night that I had taken screenshots of each of the available Amnesty International Reports for Portugal for the years 2009 to 2013 and had collated them into one screenshot as shown below. I then added my own text in red which clarified the point I was making which clearly explained the purpose of the screenshot.
Yours and others accusations last night that I have altered or falsified official documents are totally unwarranted and incorrect and I expect a full apology from you. :)
Here are the supportive links which are all referenced in the screenshot that was posted last night. Compare them all and you will clearly see that they are the same :)
2009 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2009
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2010 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2010
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2011 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2011
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2012 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2012
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
But lookee here at the 2013 report, there is no longer any reference to Goncalo Amaral or Leonor Cipriano under the heading 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2013
So Davel, why do think it is that there is now no mention of either Amaral or Cipriano in the 2013 report given that there has been in all of those years (2009 - 2012) since the original case came to court?
I'll tell you why, it is because in April 2013 Leonor Cipriano had a further 7 months added to her sentence for false testimony for lying about being tortured by the PJ. Therefore as she lied about it, Goncalo Amaral is no longer of interest regarding the Cipriano case as far as Amnesty International are concerned, hence no mention of the case in the current report.
Like I said last night, it is not rocket science :)
And now I am going out for the evening so I will be logging out and so will bid you adieu and look forward to catching up with you again :)
Oh and here is the screenshot that I posted last night :)
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3738/10335037565_7df58d6f75_b.jpg)
Thank you for that informative post Serendipity!
It makes very interesting reading. Enjoy your night, I'm sure you'll find a full apology from the forum member who made the accusations waiting for you in the morning!
-
According to my information a thread which was started merely to consider Mr Amaral's conviction ended up in the usual spates over the Leonor Cipriano case with Neeley continually posting that there was no forensic evidence. IIRC traces of Joana's blood was found on a door frame which investigators aleged was the result of a viscous assault by her uncle.
-
According to my information a thread which was started merely to consider Mr Amaral's conviction ended up with the usual spates over the Leonor Cipriano case with one poster disputing the forensic evidence which convicted her.
It often does. Those that despise Amaral for his views on the McCanns are unable (or at least unwilling) to accept that the reason he was convicted can very validly be described as a technicality. He wasn't present, he was told what had happened and he accepted that. He could hardly carry out a full investigation, he checked with Cipriano at the time and it wasn't until later that she changed her story. I'm not entirely sure what else he could have done.
IF he had denounced his men and said, "you know what, I think you tortured her..." then he'd have been caught out when Cipriano was subsequently found to have been lying! He was damned if he did and was damned if he didn't. The Portuguese legal system needs looking at!
-
I clearly recall serendipity saying he'd added the red text himself. You were so busy being outraged that you didn't seem to notice, however. The point I think he was making was that Amnesty International used to have something on their site about the torture of Cipriano and that a part of it had been removed. I was tired so didn't take it all in properly at the time. In a nutshell she was found to have lied. Therefore other than a faintly ridiculous (for a given level of ridiculous, of course) legal system judging that even though Amaral did not lie in his document he kind of didn't know he wasn't lying at the time and therefore his suspended sentence remained, it's pretty much all over bar the shouting, isn't it?
I know that you still like to fling other accusations of wrongdoing at him but as there don't seem to be any non-Amaral-hating blogs/sites to back up these alleged other misdemeanours of his, I'll take them with a pinch of salt thanks. Feel free to provide me with links to prove your point, however, I'm not saying they don't exist, just that I can't find them.
There are so many inaccuracies it is difficult to know where to start...lets take it one by one...
The statement highlighted in red...could you tell me what has been removed from the Amnesty site...nothing...the statement isn't true
I wont go any further until this one is sorted
-
I dont want to take this thread down that road again tonight but I thought an arguido required to have their lawyer with them when interviewed?? So if she confessed she must have had her lawyer otherwise the confession would be worthless?? or am i missing sommit?
-
Thank you for that informative post Serendipity!
It makes very interesting reading. Enjoy your night, I'm sure you'll find a full apology from the forum member who made the accusations waiting for you in the morning!
I don't know if you read it but you don't seem to have understood it if you think I have anything to apologise for
-
There are so many inaccuracies it is difficult to know where to start...lets take it one by one...
The statement highlighted in red...could you tell me what has been removed from the Amnesty site...nothing...the statement isn't true
I wont go any further until this one is sorted
For heavens sake davel, he only added a bit of enlarged red text by way of comment. The document itself is unchanged. What a song and dance about nout!!
Am i right in assuming some muppet claimed he had altered the text?
-
Thank you, Serendipity, and have a nice evening full of serendipities which are the salt of life !
-
Many thanks to everyone who has helped revive my thread
-
Many thanks to everyone who has helped revive my thread
Was it you who started the Amaral the truth thread davel?
-
"truth about amaral" and "agendas"? Did they descend into name calling? The Amaral one was crossing into the bounds of straight up harassment of the poor bloke but aside from that seemed to be just about under control and was quite interesting as an expose (dunno how to do the accented "e"!) about how those that really don't like him feel!
I actually thought Icabod was making a good point about Dhingra too, if I'm honest.
Dhingra has bailed. He says he wont tolerate being spoken to in such a condescending manner. 8)-)))
Well done whoever was responsible...we have just lost a valuable resource!!
-
For heavens sake davel, he only added a bit of enlarged red text by way of comment. The document itself is unchanged. What a song and dance about nout!!
Am i right in assuming some muppet claimed he had altered the text?
you seem to have misunderstood..i am referring to the false statement that amnesty have removed something from their site re amarel...it isnt true
-
you seem to have misunderstood..i am referring to the false statement that amnesty have removed something from their site re amarel...it isnt true
So it wasnt you was goin on about the red text?
-
I don't wish to answer any questions until the one I have posted is answerred.
-
you seem to have misunderstood..i am referring to the false statement that amnesty have removed something from their site re amarel...it isnt true
They did, they removed the reference to cipriano and torture and amaral and others after printing it for the last 5 yrs its there for all non blind people to see.....and the reason for it explained!!!! would be good to have an apology Davel for your accusations
-
I was told that the Amaral/Cipriano debacle was removed by Amnesty because of the perjury conviction which Leonor now has. Is that what this is all about Dave??
-
They did, they removed the reference to cipriano and torture after printing it for the last 5 yrs its there for all non blind people to see.....and the reason for it explained!!!! would be good to have an apology Davel for your accusations
You are wrong...nothing has been removed
-
You are wrong...nothing has been removed
but its not on the 2013 report? 8-)(--)
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2013
-
I was told that the Amaral/Cipriano debacle was removed by Amnesty because of the perjury conviction which Leonor now has. Is that what this is all about Dave??
if something is removed it has to be present first...so where has areference been removed from
-
but its not on the 2013 report? 8-)(--)
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2013
so are you saying it was and its been removed
-
I was told that the Amaral/Cipriano debacle was removed by Amnesty because of the perjury conviction which Leonor now has. Is that what this is all about Dave??
###who told you it had been removed..it isn't true
-
I am not all that familiar with the reports but according to what serendipity posted it appears that Amaral featured in all the reports up until 2012 then nothing.
This is all it reports on torture and ill treatment in the 2103 report...
Torture and other ill-treatment
A criminal investigation into the use of a Taser against an inmate in Paços de Ferreira prison in 2010 did not progress despite the findings of an inquiry by the Audit and Inspection services of the General Directorate for prisons that two members of the Prison Security Intervention Group had used the weapon disproportionately. The outcome of disciplinary proceedings against the two prison officers remained pending at the end of the year.
The trial of three police officers accused of torturing Virgolino Borges in March 2000 while in police custody, which started in November 2011, made little progress.
No mention of Amaral and no mention of the Cipriano case....right?
-
could you tell me what has been removed..it is this false allegation which I would like to settle first.seeing as Ive been asked to aplogise.
-
From the 2012 report...
Torture and other ill-treatment
In February, a video showing prison guards using a dart-firing stun gun against an inmate in Paços de Ferreira prison in September 2010, allegedly to force him to clean his cell, was broadcast on the internet. The man appeared to offer no resistance. In April, the Minister of Justice issued a decree forbidding the use of stun guns in similar circumstances. An inquiry by the Audit and Inspection services of the General Directorate for prisons was pending at the end of the year.
In March, the Court of Appeal of Evora confirmed an earlier ruling that Leonor Cipriano had been tortured while in police custody in 2004, but that it could not identify those responsible. Leonor Cipriano had yet to receive compensation from the state. Gonçalo de Sousa Amaral and António Fernandes Nuno Cardoso, senior officials in the judicial police, had been sentenced to 18 months’ and 27 months’ imprisonment respectively, for falsely claiming Leonor Cipriano had fallen down the stairs. However, both sentences were suspended on the grounds that the officers had no previous criminal convictions.
Hearings in the trial of three police officers, accused of torturing Virgolino Borges while in police custody in March 2000, took place in November and December. Virgolino Borges was asked to give his testimony again as the recording had allegedly been lost due to technical problems.
All reference to Amaral and Cipriano have been removed.
-
could you tell me what has been removed..as even you have stated now
-
to be honest you are the one who doesn't understand
-
jesus wept...night nght
-
perhaps serendipity can tell us later what has been removed and from where
-
perhaps serendipity can tell us later what has been removed and from where
Oh god... You're not really going for the angle I think you are, are you... That it's never been on the 2013 report so it can't have been removed?
-
perhaps serendipity can tell us later what has been removed and from where
davel, did you click the links?
All reference to Lenora Ciprano (sp) have been removed.
It's no longer listed as a Portuguese torture case.
-
Oh god... You're not really going for the angle I think you are, are you... That it's never been on the 2013 report so it can't have been removed?
I don't know whether to @)(++(* or 8)><(
I've got a horrible feeling you're going to be right!
-
Oh god... You're not really going for the angle I think you are, are you... That it's never been on the 2013 report so it can't have been removed?
That's the truth nothing has been removed
-
That's the truth nothing has been removed
where in the report does the word nothing appear 8-)(--)
-
davel, did you click the links?
All reference to Lenora Ciprano (sp) have been removed.
It's no longer listed as a Portuguese torture case.
This is getting tiresome..what has been removed ..all references are still there nothing has been removed
BUT// But do you know why it is no longer listed as an ongoing torture case
-
That's the truth nothing has been removed
Tell me Dave, does the 2013 Report refer to Dr Amaral or Leonor Cipriano? A simple yes or no will suffice.
BUT But do you know why it is no longer listed as an ongoing torture case
Could it be because there was no torture?
-
Tell me Dave, does the 2013 Report refer to Dr Amaral or Leonor Cipriano? A simple yes or no will suffice.
No it doesn't..but this brings us to ther second untruth...why are they no longer mentioned
-
Tell me Dave, does the 2013 Report refer to Dr Amaral or Leonor Cipriano? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Could it be because there was no torture?
nope wrong there..the Portuguese court accept torture took place otherwise amaral and his pals would have had their convictions quashed
-
No it doesn't..but this brings us to ther second untruth...why are they no longer mentioned
So thank you for agreeing that something has been removed. 8((()*/
Why have they been removed? Is it because the case was such a mess or is it because Leonor has now been found guilty of perjury? ..or is it that nobody cares any more?
-
So thank you for agreeing that something has been removed. 8((()*/
Why have they been removed? Is it because the case was such a mess or is it because Leonor has now been found guilty of perjury?
Nothing has been removed its just that it no longer features..and the question is why is it no longer featured on Amnesties site
-
surely if Amnesty thought they were wrong they would have printed a correction on its site this year
-
I don't know whether to @)(++(* or 8)><(
I've got a horrible feeling you're going to be right!
I am right
-
Nothing has been removed its just that it no longer features..and the question is why is it no longer featured on Amnesties site
Because nobody is interested in a child killer Dave. a woman of few morals who allowed her brother to murder her own daughter.
-
Because nobody is interested in a child killer Dave.
so why have they been posting reports for several years re her torture
-
so why have they been posting reports for several years re her torture
That was before the court decided she was a perjurer. Amnesty cannot possibly be seen to be fighting the corner of such a person.
Anyways off for tea.
-
That was before the court decided she was a perjurer. Amnesty cannot possibly be seen to be fighting the corner of such a person.
Anyways off for tea.
Now you are quoting opinion just as serendipity was, so they fought the corner of a child killer but drew the line at perjury...sounds a bit silly angelo
-
in my opinion the reason the cipriano torture case was not featured on the Amnesty site this year is that the case was concluded last year, torture proved and the perpetrators punished. As far as Amnesty was concerned the case was closed and finalised in 2012...no need for any further action
-
in my opinion the reason the cipriano torture case was not featured on the Amnesty site this year is that the case was concluded last year, torture proved and the perpetrators punished. As far as Amnesty was concerned the case was closed and finalised in 2012...no need for any further action
... but she's still in prison
-
... but she's still in prison
what does that have to do with amnesty
-
what does that have to do with amnesty
I thought amnesty fought for people who were wrongly imprisoned
If they concluded that Cipriano had been tortured into confessing, and wrongly imprisoned as a consequence, why would they stop pleading her case ?
-
Dhingra has bailed. He says he wont tolerate being spoken to in such a condescending manner. 8)-)))
Well done whoever was responsible...we have just lost a valuable resource!!
I'm innocent, I was the first to suggest he attracted attention on him with his secrets... Ah now I remember, he evoked some sort of technique he couldn't reveal before the show !
-
I thought amnesty fought for people who were wrongly imprisoned
If they concluded that Cipriano had been tortured into confessing, and wrongly imprisoned as a consequence, why would they stop pleading her case ?
Amnesty was looking only at the torture..read the reports
-
I am right
No, not you. C.Edwards was right.
I'm impressed. I'd never have guessed that that was the angle you were going for. It's boarding on ingenious because of course you are technically right which is really not the same as being actually right.
Forgive me for going off topic a moment, but I have to know, were you ever a Red Dwarf fan? Do you know who Rimmer is?
-
No, not you. C.Edwards was right.
I'm impressed. I'd never have guessed that that was the angle you were going for. It's boarding on ingenious because of course you are technically right which is really not the same as being actually right.
Forgive me for going off topic a moment, but I have to know, were you ever a Red Dwarf fan? Do you know who Rimmer is?
I am right and of course I do
-
Things do disappear from here with no explanation which is disconcerting imo
The other week mid Luz in rant I asked if Luz, montclair, Anne Guedes were related to Amaral or in his close circle. From memory it vanished with no explanation.
-
So despite the conviction for torture..tavares is still a policeman
-
You are wrong about Virgolino Borges, Angelo
Two PJ inspectors condemned
25/01/2013 21:10
PJ , Virgolino Borges
Two chief inspectors of the PJ were today sentenced to two years and six months imprisonment with suspended sentence for torture against the official CP Virgolino Borges, told Lusa the victim's lawyer.
The panel of judges of the 3rd. Lisbon criminal court condemned the crimes of torture and ill-treatment, co-authored material, the current chief inspectors Diamond José Santos and Vitor Tavares de Almeida, forcing them even to pay a fine of 80 euros / month for the same period, indicated Lusa lawyer Jerónimo Martins.
The same process was also acquitted the chief inspector Antonio Alves da Cunha, having been applied the principle "in dubio pro reo" (when in doubt decide in favor of the defendant).
Jerónimo Martins stressed the importance of the judgment, because it is the "first time" that the PJ inspectors are "individually convicted" of a crime of torture.
The lawyer considered "to have done some justice, because for the first time felt that PJ officers are not immune nor are absolutely untouchable for assaulting citizens."
Despite the conviction of two agents of PJ's attorney Virgolino Borges did not exclude the possibility of an appeal against the ruling by one of the inspectors have been acquitted and his client have reiterated throughout the process was one of the attackers.
At the material time - 2 and March 3, 2000 - Virgolino Borges was responding to the Central Directorate for Combating Gangsterism (DCCB), in Lisbon, and suffered multiple rib fractures, bruises and also presenting other injuries, he said.
As to whether the defendants have been subject to any disciplinary proceedings in PJ and remain in office, Jerónimo Martins replied: "As far as I know, were not the subject of any disciplinary process."
He said that "Victor Tavares de Almeida keeps the service in Lagos, while Alves da Cunha Santos Diamond and remains on the board of Lisbon, although the latter is dealing with retirement."
Lusa contacted the Association of PJ officers about the court's decision, and its president, Carlos Garcia, stated that an appeal will be lodged condemnation.
Virgolino Borges accused the inspectors have tortured during interrogation to obtain a confession about the authorship of a theft, occurred in CP, your workplace.
So that's the Lead Investigator and his 2nd in command in the McCann case, both convicted criminals!! You couldn't make it up could you.
-
So that's the Lead Investigator and his 2nd in command in the McCann case, both convicted criminals!! You couldn't make it up could you.
What a kick ! From convicted criminals right to Madeleine McCann !
-
So that's the Lead Investigator and his 2nd in command in the McCann case, both convicted criminals!! You couldn't make it up could you.
There's other good buddies and witness's of Amarals too 8()(((@#
-
There's other good buddies and witness's of Amarals too 8()(((@#
And I ask again: why does it matter? There is a section of McCann supporters that remain desperate to smear every single one of the Portuguese investigating team that cast a critical eye at the McCanns.
Even if Amaral was a fraudster, wife beater, donkey-molester, gun runner, whatever... where is the logical connection that any of that would stop him carrying out his duties? I just don't get the obsession. It's purely a deflective mechanism in order to try and make a point along the lines of, "well that person did x so how can you possible trust them to do anything right, hmm?" which is clearly a complete horlicks of an argument.
-
No, not you. C.Edwards was right.
I'm impressed. I'd never have guessed that that was the angle you were going for. It's boarding on ingenious because of course you are technically right which is really not the same as being actually right.
Forgive me for going off topic a moment, but I have to know, were you ever a Red Dwarf fan? Do you know who Rimmer is?
@)(++(*
-
And I ask again: why does it matter? There is a section of McCann supporters that remain desperate to smear every single one of the Portuguese investigating team that cast a critical eye at the McCanns.
Even if Amaral was a fraudster, wife beater, donkey-molester, gun runner, whatever... where is the logical connection that any of that would stop him carrying out his duties? I just don't get the obsession. It's purely a deflective mechanism in order to try and make a point along the lines of, "well that person did x so how can you possible trust them to do anything right, hmm?" which is clearly a complete horlicks of an argument.
This is something that has baffled me ( and not just with regard to Amaral either ) ... it seems there is a compulsion to malign and denigrate anyone who might be seen to pose even the slightest doubt on the McCanns' version of events
-
This is something that has baffled me ( and not just with regard to Amaral either ) ... it seems there is a compulsion to malign and denigrate anyone who might be seen to pose even the slightest doubt on the McCanns' version of events
Andy Redwood is maligned and denigrated simply because he believes Madeleine was abducted - and yet no-one is supposed to comment on the outrageous fact that a perjurer and a torturer were actually allowed to be in charge of the McCann case? And you say YOU are baffled??
-
Andy Redwood is maligned and denigrated simply because he believes Madeleine was abducted - and yet no-one is supposed to comment on the outrageous fact that a perjurer and a torturer were actually allowed to be in charge of the McCann case? And you say YOU are baffled??
"Andy Redwood is maligned and denigrated simply because he believes Madeleine was abducted"
Really? When exactly did you have access to Redwoods inner thoughts?
He believes she was abducted? So he is not actually certain on that issue then, It's just a belief he has,
But of course he couldn't be certain she was abducted, because there is no evidence of it.
-
This is something that has baffled me ( and not just with regard to Amaral either ) ... it seems there is a compulsion to malign and denigrate anyone who might be seen to pose even the slightest doubt on the McCanns' version of events
Amply demonstrated by Benice's post 76 above this one.
-
i have davel on permanant ignore never online has someone annoyed me so much with their passive agressive posts
-
i have davel on permanant ignore never online has someone annoyed me so much with their passive agressive posts
Thank heavens
-
despite all the cries I was wrong no one has managed to prove such.
to recap and perhaps close the thread the cipriano torture case was featured on The Amnesty website until 2012 when the case was finalised. none of these statements have been removed.
the case was never featured on the 2013 site because the case was concluded in 2013 so again nothing was removed.
-
despite all the cries I was wrong no one has managed to prove such.
to recap and perhaps close the thread the cipriano torture case was featured on The Amnesty website until 2012 when the case was finalised. none of these statements have been removed.
the case was never featured on the 2013 site because the case was concluded in 2013 so again nothing was removed.
None of that changes the fact that you accused Serendipity of changing the documents. Why don't you close the thread with a nice apology?
-
None of that changes the fact that you accused Serendipity of changing the documents. Why don't you close the thread with a nice apology?
Apology? First Edwards claimed I was wrong..yet he was wrong and has failed to offer one post in his defence.
secondly serendipity did change the document...I asked him several times if he had and he would not reply..the evidence has been removed..I don't know why..Edwards should apologise to me
-
Admin ... maybe you could change the title of this thread to "Welcome to the hairsplitters convention "
8)-)))
-
Admin ... maybe you could change the title of this thread to "Welcome to the hairsplitters convention "
8)-)))
remember the thread was started by Edwards..or perhaps you had forgotten that
-
Admin ... maybe you could change the title of this thread to "Welcome to the hairsplitters convention "
8)-)))
You seem to want to gloss over that both edawrds and serendipity made outrageous claims that Amnesty had removed information from their website re Amaral..if this was true it would have been quite significant.
However I was able to show that what they were posting was totally untrue and it his highly significant that neither of them has made any defence of their initial inaccurate claims
-
Remind me... Which one is the 'laughing at davel' smiley? I'm pretty sure I need it!
-
Remind me... Which one is the 'laughing at davel' smiley? I'm pretty sure I need it!
im pretty sure you need it too..in order to divert attention away from the fact that you were wrong
-
im pretty sure you need it too..in order to divert attention away from the fact that you were wrong
Dammit, where's my davel bingo card when I need it!? Oh what the heck... "house!".
-
Dammit, where's my davel bingo card when I need it!? Oh what the heck... "house!".
i was almost expecting sensible response but yet another attempt to divert attention...
-
Remind me... Which one is the 'laughing at davel' smiley? I'm pretty sure I need it!
@)(++(*
-
@)(++(*
i thought you had me on permanent ignore..if so you shouldn't comment on my post..doesn't really matter...your post again does not address the issue and is yet another attempt to divert.
-
i thought you had me on permanent ignore..if so you shouldn't comment on my post..doesn't really matter...your post again does not address the issue and is yet another attempt to divert.
She didnt comment on your post... she laughed at CEs post, follow your own advice and read posts properly?
8((()*/
-
i thought you had me on permanent ignore..if so you shouldn't comment on my post..doesn't really matter...your post again does not address the issue and is yet another attempt to divert.
... Which will be why she replied to me, not you. Try and keep up. I'm almost amazed you think you're in some way important or interesting enough to reply to. I thank you for single handedly demonstrating to all who may read this thread just what a petty and bitter man you are. 8((()*/
-
She didnt comment on your post... she laughed at CEs post, follow your own advice and read posts properly?
8((()*/
She commented on a post about me ..yet another who wants to criticise but cannot post a relevant post on the actual topic
-
... Which will be why she replied to me, not you. Try and keep up. I'm almost amazed you think you're in some way important or interesting enough to reply to. I thank you for single handedly demonstrating to all who may read this thread just what a petty and bitter man you are. 8((()*/
That's about eight posts now where three posters have attacked me personally without commenting on the actual issue. ITS SAYS A LOT ABOUT THE WEAKNESS OF YOUR ARGUMENT
-
Remind me... Which one is the 'laughing at davel' smiley? I'm pretty sure I need it!
When you find it, please let me know as I'd like to use it myself lol
It is crystal clear that dear davel has comprehension issues as well as a very large bee in his bonnet regarding Goncalo Amaral.
Davel, I'd like you to demonstrate to me just exactly where in my post I mentioned the word removed? I clearly explained each time I posted my screenshot that due to Leonor Cipriano receiving a further 7 months for lying about torture that Goncalo was no longer of interest to Amnesty International and therefore there was no requirement to make reference to him in their 2013 report following her trial and conviction in April 2013. Note the word 'referenced'
By the way, your blatant lies about me refusing to answer your questions just makes you look stupid as many here were witnesss to the original deleted thread. But why let truth get in the way of a good shilling session eh ;)
To save you scrolling back up I have reposted what I said yesterday so that you can show the forum exactly where I allegedly stated Amnesty had 'removed' information from their website :)
My post from last night:
"I clearly stated last night that I had taken screenshots of each of the available Amnesty International Reports for Portugal for the years 2009 to 2013 and had collated them into one screenshot as shown below. I then added my own text in red which clarified the point I was making which clearly explained the purpose of the screenshot.
Yours and others accusations last night that I have altered or falsified official documents are totally unwarranted and incorrect and I expect a full apology from you. :)
Here are the supportive links which are all referenced in the screenshot that was posted last night. Compare them all and you will clearly see that they are the same :)
2009 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2009
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2010 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2010
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2011 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2011
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2012 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2012
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
But lookee here at the 2013 report, there is no longer any reference to Goncalo Amaral or Leonor Cipriano under the heading 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2013
So Davel, why do think it is that there is now no mention of either Amaral or Cipriano in the 2013 report given that there has been in all of those years (2009 - 2012) since the original case came to court?
I'll tell you why, it is because in April 2013 Leonor Cipriano had a further 7 months added to her sentence for false testimony for lying about being tortured by the PJ. Therefore as she lied about it, Goncalo Amaral is no longer of interest regarding the Cipriano case as far as Amnesty International are concerned, hence no mention of the case in the current report.
Like I said last night, it is not rocket science :)
And now I am going out for the evening so I will be logging out and so will bid you adieu and look forward to catching up with you again :)
Oh and here is the screenshot that I posted last night :)"
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3738/10335037565_7df58d6f75_b.jpg)
-
That's about eight posts now where three posters have attacked me personally without commenting on the actual issue. ITS SAYS A LOT ABOUT THE WEAKNESS OF YOUR ARGUMENT
Oh stop... Please. You'll have me in tears. @)(++(*
-
Oh stop... Please. You'll have me in tears. @)(++(*
Oh. Stop it. Lol. I'm on my iPad In bed and I'm laughing. So hard my fingers are shaking lmao
-
As the thread has been removed i cant quote but fortunately Edwards has confirmed this
I clearly recall serendipity saying he'd added the red text himself. You were so busy being outraged that you didn't seem to notice, however. The point I think he was making was that Amnesty International used to have something on their site about the torture of Cipriano and that a part of it had been removed. I was tired so didn't take it all in properly at the time. In a nutshell she was found to have lied. Therefore other than a faintly ridiculous (for a given level of ridiculous, of course) legal system judging that even though Amaral did not lie in his document he kind of didn't know he wasn't lying at the time and therefore his suspended sentence remained, it's pretty much all over bar the shouting, isn't it?
I know that you still like to fling other accusations of wrongdoing at him but as there don't seem to be any non-Amaral-hating blogs/sites to back up these alleged other misdemeanours of his, I'll take them with a pinch of salt thanks. Feel free to provide me with links to prove your point, however, I'm not saying they don't exist, just that I can't find them.
So there you are
-
The thread that just keeps giving. @)(++(* @)(++(* go on Davel, keep digging 8((()*/
-
She commented on a post about me ..yet another who wants to criticise but cannot post a relevant post on the actual topic
Which is not what you said,**** LOL, just posting like you continuously do,calling people liars etc for the minutest, just to demonstrate your double standards....well in a hole stop digging, Im not going to be dragged into your pedantry and hypocricy tonight so enjoy the rest and do try and apologise.....somethng i bet you never do however wrong youre proven, now whay is the adjective for that kind of mentality? as for attacking, pot kettle black, youre always attacking and denigrating people, people here are just showing you you are wrong!!! But you dont have the good grace to apologise.
@)(++(*
****
i thought you had me on permanent ignore..if so you shouldn't comment on my post
-
serendipity..you asked me to show where in your post you used the word removed...edwards has confirmed you used the word.....i await your response
-
Do people here read the newspaper and find themselves concluding that any stories that were reported the day before must have been wrong because they aren't in today's issue?
-
serendipity..you asked me to show where in your post you used the word removed...edwards has confirmed you used the word.....i await your response
Ooh. Start of my next card. Claiming a poster has said something they haven't. 8@??)(
-
I mean, earlier in the week I read that England had qualified for the next World Cup, but it wasn't mentioned in today's paper, so I assume that story was incorrect?
-
As the thread has been removed i cant quote but fortunately Edwards has confirmed this
I clearly recall serendipity saying he'd added the red text himself. You were so busy being outraged that you didn't seem to notice, however. The point I think he was making was that Amnesty International used to have something on their site about the torture of Cipriano and that a part of it had been removed. I was tired so didn't take it all in properly at the time. In a nutshell she was found to have lied. Therefore other than a faintly ridiculous (for a given level of ridiculous, of course) legal system judging that even though Amaral did not lie in his document he kind of didn't know he wasn't lying at the time and therefore his suspended sentence remained, it's pretty much all over bar the shouting, isn't it?
I know that you still like to fling other accusations of wrongdoing at him but as there don't seem to be any non-Amaral-hating blogs/sites to back up these alleged other misdemeanours of his, I'll take them with a pinch of salt thanks. Feel free to provide me with links to prove your point, however, I'm not saying they don't exist, just that I can't find them.
So there you are
Umm did you not see the bit where he says "The point I think he was making .." lol. G Edwards clearly tied you up in knots on your original thread when he eloqently explained a very good analogy as to why GA's conviction was based on a technicality and then I came along, backed him up and them proceeeded to demonstrate why Amnesty no longer make reference to GA re Cipriano case on their site.
Not one of my posts has contained the word 'removed' :) Why would I use it when I clearly use the words 'not referenced' in the text I added onto my own screenshot collated using 5 Amnesty reports lol. Maybe admin can confirm if there is a recycle bin for deleted threads? I'm not sure if such a thing exists.
What is not to understand? Frankly I find you hilarious as I am sure many others do :)
-
Umm did you not see the bit where he says "The point I think he was making .." lol. G Edwards clearly tied you up in knots on your original thread when he eloqently explained a very good analogy as to why GA's conviction was based on a technicality and then I came along, backed him up and them proceeeded to demonstrate why Amnesty no longer make reference to GA re Cipriano case on their site.
Not one of my posts has contained the word 'removed' :) Why would I use it when I clearly use the words 'not referenced' in the text I added onto my own screenshot collated using 5 Amnesty reports lol. Maybe admin can confirm if there is a recycle bin for deleted threads? I'm not sure if such a thing exists.
What is not to understand? Frankly I find you hilarious as I am sure many others do :)
]
Edwards has confirmed you used the words removed..you have been caught out ..but never mind
-
Anyway, I will leave you to froth and fester Davel as I have packing to do as I am away to Carlisle at 5.30 in the morning :) Just man up and accept you were wrong, it's no biggie for heavens sake. :)
Have a lovely rest of the weekend all :) It will realisitically be Tuesday now before I log in again :)
-
serendipity..lets move on
so why in your opinion is there no mention of the cipriano torture case on the 2013 report
-
Anyway, I will leave you to froth and fester Davel as I have packing to do as I am away to Carlisle at 5.30 in the morning :) Just man up and accept you were wrong, it's no biggie for heavens sake. :)
Have a lovely rest of the weekend all :) It will realisitically be Tuesday now before I log in again :)
wrong im absolutely right..we will continue this discussion when you are available
-
Ilook forward to continuing the debate with serendipity as there are further untruths he has posted...but this time I have saved the screenshots
-
Anyway, I will leave you to froth and fester Davel as I have packing to do as I am away to Carlisle at 5.30 in the morning :) Just man up and accept you were wrong, it's no biggie for heavens sake. :)
Have a lovely rest of the weekend all :) It will realisitically be Tuesday now before I log in again :)
to be continued tomorrow
-
I was told that the Amaral/Cipriano debacle was removed by Amnesty because of the perjury conviction which Leonor now has. Is that what this is all about Dave??
yes thats what its all about...another myth
-
I clearly stated last night that I had taken screenshots of each of the available Amnesty International Reports for Portugal for the years 2009 to 2013 and had collated them into one screenshot as shown below. I then added my own text in red which clarified the point I was making which clearly explained the purpose of the screenshot.
Yours and others accusations last night that I have altered or falsified official documents are totally unwarranted and incorrect and I expect a full apology from you. :)
Here are the supportive links which are all referenced in the screenshot that was posted last night. Compare them all and you will clearly see that they are the same :)
2009 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2009
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2010 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2010
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2011 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2011
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
2012 Amnesty International Report
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2012
Reference to Cipriano case found under 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
But lookee here at the 2013 report, there is no longer any reference to Goncalo Amaral or Leonor Cipriano under the heading 'Torture and other ill-treatment'
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2013
So Davel, why do think it is that there is now no mention of either Amaral or Cipriano in the 2013 report given that there has been in all of those years (2009 - 2012) since the original case came to court?
I'll tell you why, it is because in April 2013 Leonor Cipriano had a further 7 months added to her sentence for false testimony for lying about being tortured by the PJ. Therefore as she lied about it, Goncalo Amaral is no longer of interest regarding the Cipriano case as far as Amnesty International are concerned, hence no mention of the case in the current report.
Like I said last night, it is not rocket science :)
And now I am going out for the evening so I will be logging out and so will bid you adieu and look forward to catching up with you again :)
Oh and here is the screenshot that I posted last night :)
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3738/10335037565_7df58d6f75_b.jpg)
could you confirm ce that your conclusions are the same as serendipity which he has printed in red
-
They could always be asked.
England
The Amnesty UK headquarters and registered office is based in London, at the following address:
General Enquiries
For general enquiries please contact the Supporter Care Team in our London office:
Amnesty International UK
The Human Rights Action Centre
17-25 New Inn Yard
London EC2A 3EA
Phone +44 (0) 20 7033 1777
Fax +44 (0) 20 7033 1503
Textphone +44 (0) 20 7033 1664
Email sct@amnesty.org.uk
-
could you confirm ce that your conclusions are the same as serendipity which he has printed in red
I'm not confirming anything. You said my conclusions were wrong. That's a definitive statement, not conditional. Now you're asking me what my conclusions are? Do you know what you're doing? Why are my conclusions wrong and what conclusions are they please?
-
I'm not confirming anything. You said my conclusions were wrong. That's a definitive statement, not conditional. Now you're asking me what my conclusions are? Do you know what you're doing? Why are my conclusions wrong and what conclusions are they please?
you see why its so important to ask these questions at the start
-
you posted..
I clearly recall serendipity saying he'd added the red text himself. You were so busy being outraged that you didn't seem to notice, however. The point I think he was making was that Amnesty International used
to have something on their site about the torture of Cipriano and that a part of it had been removed. I was tired so didn't take it all in properly at the time. In a nutshell she was found to have lied. Therefore other than a faintly ridiculous (for a given level of ridiculous, of course) legal system judging that even though Amaral did not lie in his document he kind of didn't know he wasn't lying at the time and therefore his suspended sentence remained, it's pretty much all over bar the shouting, isn't it?
well how about that for a start
-
you posted..
I clearly recall serendipity saying he'd added the red text himself. You were so busy being outraged that you didn't seem to notice, however. The point I think he was making was that Amnesty International used
to have something on their site about the torture of Cipriano and that a part of it had been removed. I was tired so didn't take it all in properly at the time. In a nutshell she was found to have lied. Therefore other than a faintly ridiculous (for a given level of ridiculous, of course) legal system judging that even though Amaral did not lie in his document he kind of didn't know he wasn't lying at the time and therefore his suspended sentence remained, it's pretty much all over bar the shouting, isn't it?
well how about that for a start
Davel. Stop being obtuse. You said my conclusions are wrong. You cannot state that without saying what those conclusions are. Put up or shut up.
-
Dave, can I ask why you think all references to Amaral and Leonor Cipriano are now missing from the Amnesty International Report on torture and other ill-treatment for 2013?
Has there been an oversight?
-
Davel. Stop being obtuse. You said my conclusions are wrong. You cannot state that without saying what those conclusions are. Put up or shut up.
you have supported serendipities version of events in countless posts as everyone has seen. im not going to trawl through all your posts to prove it. how wise I was to check you out before starting the debate..I will wait and discuss with serendipity..off to watch university challenge now
-
Dave, can I ask why you think all references to Amaral and Leonor Cipriano are now missing from the Amnesty International Report on torture and other ill-treatment for 2013?
Has there been an oversight?
thers nothing missing will reply later after UC
-
you have supported serendipities version of events in countless posts as everyone has seen. im not going to trawl through all your posts to prove it. how wise I was to check you out before starting the debate..I will wait and discuss with serendipity..off to watch university challenge now
"countless"? "check me out"? "not going to trawl through"? "debate"?
You said, "The amnesty thread, if you understood it showed that the conclusions of both ce and serendipity were we wrong" and I asked you to explain how I was wrong. You then asked me what my conclusions were. Can you not see that this is just disruptive and futile? You're just goading people all the time and then you claim that you're in the right all the time!
Well you can do one. I simply cannot be bothered with you any more. You're just arguing for the sake of it and it's dragging this board down now.
-
thers nothing missing will reply later after UC
Well it isn't there so I fail to see your logic? 8-)(--)
Clearly, Amnesty International are guided by the Courts consequently Leonor's perjury conviction has undermined what little credibility she ever had. If Amaral hadn't put his name to that dodgy PJ Report he too would have been exonerated.
-
Dave, can I ask why you think all references to Amaral and Leonor Cipriano are now missing from the Amnesty International Report on torture and other ill-treatment for 2013?
Has there been an oversight?
IIRC Davel posted somethng like, that seeing as the case was concluded with the conviction of x y z people there was no need for Amnesty to feature the case anymore.....so they stopped.....only we know it didnt stop there, she was convicted to a further x months on prison for lying .....this happened AFTER those convictions...either Amnesty stopped following the case or chose not to print that...I suppose its not their job? Or did they have a responsibility to....?
ETA yes, read post 60........
ETA 2 changed Johns quote as I replied to the wrong one
-
pick on davel night again I see ..
-
Amnesty International couldn't possibly showcase an alleged case of torture if the person to whom it is supposed to relate has not only been convicted of murder but also of having quite blatantly committed perjury on several occasions at her trial even when cautioned by the judge not to do so. She changed her story so many times it still amazes me how anyone could believe a word she uttered. The woman is a pathological liar.
-
Dave, can I ask why you think all references to Amaral and Leonor Cipriano are now missing from the Amnesty International Report on torture and other ill-treatment for 2013?
Has there been an oversight?
There's no oversight...The torture case was concluded in 2012 when torture was proved and the guilty punished. from them on it was no concern to amnesty and therefore not reported on in 2013
-
Dave, can I ask why you think all references to Amaral and Leonor Cipriano are now missing from the Amnesty International Report on torture and other ill-treatment for 2013?
Has there been an oversight?
just to add all the references are there for previous years are still there, nothing has been removed
-
There's no oversight...The torture case was concluded in 2012 when torture was proved and the guilty punished. from them on it was no concern to amnesty and therefore not reported on in 2013
Which people guilty of torture were punished, I thought no PJ was found gulty of torture?......or have ai remembered it wrong
-
Well it isn't there so I fail to see your logic? 8-)(--)
Clearly, Amnesty International are guided by the Courts consequently Leonor's perjury conviction has undermined what little credibility she ever had. If Amaral hadn't put his name to that dodgy PJ Report he too would have been exonerated.
the Portuguese court still accepts that torture happened...no one has been cleared
-
pick on davel night again I see ..
don't worry Benita, doesn't bother me in the slightest
-
the Portuguese court still accepts that torture happened...no one has been cleared
No ones been been convicted....therefore the accused were cleared by the court, no? And the guilty still to be found....?
-
The three PJ officers were exonerated.
Three officers were cleared of torture but Mr Amaral was found guilty of falsifying documents and given an 18-month suspended sentence.
http://news.sky.com/story/694940/madeleine-cop-gets-suspended-sentence
-
No ones been been convicted....therefore the accused were cleared by the court, no?
Amaral was convicted and if you look on the Amnesty site for 2012 it will tell you the names of the others..no one has been cleared
-
The three PJ officers were exonerated.
Three officers were cleared of torture but Mr Amaral was found guilty of falsifying documents and given an 18-month suspended sentence.
http://news.sky.com/story/694940/madeleine-cop-gets-suspended-sentence
Where have you read that
-
Amaral was convicted and if you look on the Amnesty site for 2012 it will tell you the names of the others..no one has been cleared
Not so fast, you implied those guilty of torture were punished.....
and yes those accused by cipriano and her mad lawyer of torture were all cleared
In anycase, I must take a break from your warped sense of language use, I have patience of a saint but youre too much, your twisting shifting and turning, enough for one day....
Enjoy though
-
The three PJ officers were exonerated.
Three officers were cleared of torture but Mr Amaral was found guilty of falsifying documents and given an 18-month suspended sentence.
http://news.sky.com/story/694940/madeleine-cop-gets-suspended-sentence
sorry Im watching tv at the same time..the court confirmed torture had taken place but was not able to identify those responsible therefore no one was found guilty
-
The Court of Faro today condemned Leonor Cipriano to seven months in prison for having made false statements in the case in which five PJ inspectors accused of crimes of aggression and torture.
This penalty is in addition to the 16 years that the defendant complies with the murder of her daughter Joana - missing in the village of Figueira, Portimão, on 12 September 2004 - and which has served about half.
According to the court, it was proven that Leonor Cipriano lied about how officers beat her and submitted in court different versions of events that occurred during the interrogations she underwent in 2004, after the crime.
According to the judge who delivered the judgment today, despite not having taken oath, the defendant, acting as assistant, was warned that she could not miss the fact, at the risk of being punished, and if it did, "she did so because wanted "and consciously.
The court held that the illegality committed is "remarkable gravity" and is "above average degree", given the severe sentence that the defendant complies, the seriousness of the facts, the defendants and the quality of media coverage of the case.
"It is crystal clear that the defendant lacked the truth," the judgment, which highlights various contradictions as to how she was attacked and agents who were present at the interrogation room where he says she was assaulted.
The possibility of imposing a suspended sentence was dismissed because the court finds that, despite the heavy prison sentence that fulfils the defendant continued to show disrespect for the rules.
The court added that it would be "naive" to think that a "mere threat" of imprisonment contributes to the "recovery" of the defendant, who was waived today to appear in court to hear the reading of the judgment.
The contradictory statements about the attacks that were targeted were delivered between 2008 and 2009, during the trial of the inspectors who investigated the "Joana case" that resulted in the conviction of two of the five defendants in the case.
The court gave as proven assaults, though without finding the identity of the attackers.
Gonçalo Amaral, former coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department of the PJ of Portimão, was acquitted of the crime of failure to report abuse and sentenced to a year and a half for the crime of making false allegations, were suspended for the same period.
The inspector António Nunes Cardoso was sentenced to two years and three months for forgery of document, sentence suspended for two years.
The former agents of PJ Paulo Pereira Cristovao Morgado Leonel Marques and Paulo Marques Bom, who were accused of having tortured Leonor Cipriano in interrogations conducted in Faro PJ, were acquitted.
-
How come amaral was suspended? How did she recieve the black eyes etc
And what happened about her and her brother killing her and his @@@@@ being found .
Ive not followed the case for years ,last i heard the police said she was having sex with her brother when joana caught them so they killed her ????
-
The Court of Faro today condemned Leonor Cipriano to seven months in prison for having made false statements in the case in which five PJ inspectors accused of crimes of aggression and torture.
This penalty is in addition to the 16 years that the defendant complies with the murder of her daughter Joana - missing in the village of Figueira, Portimão, on 12 September 2004 - and which has served about half.
According to the court, it was proven that Leonor Cipriano lied about how officers beat her and submitted in court different versions of events that occurred during the interrogations she underwent in 2004, after the crime.
According to the judge who delivered the judgment today, despite not having taken oath, the defendant, acting as assistant, was warned that she could not miss the fact, at the risk of being punished, and if it did, "she did so because wanted "and consciously.
The court held that the illegality committed is "remarkable gravity" and is "above average degree", given the severe sentence that the defendant complies, the seriousness of the facts, the defendants and the quality of media coverage of the case.
"It is crystal clear that the defendant lacked the truth," the judgment, which highlights various contradictions as to how she was attacked and agents who were present at the interrogation room where he says she was assaulted.
The possibility of imposing a suspended sentence was dismissed because the court finds that, despite the heavy prison sentence that fulfils the defendant continued to show disrespect for the rules.
The court added that it would be "naive" to think that a "mere threat" of imprisonment contributes to the "recovery" of the defendant, who was waived today to appear in court to hear the reading of the judgment.
The contradictory statements about the attacks that were targeted were delivered between 2008 and 2009, during the trial of the inspectors who investigated the "Joana case" that resulted in the conviction of two of the five defendants in the case.
The court gave as proven assaults, though without finding the identity of the attackers.
Gonçalo Amaral, former coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department of the PJ of Portimão, was acquitted of the crime of failure to report abuse and sentenced to a year and a half for the crime of making false allegations, were suspended for the same period.
The inspector António Nunes Cardoso was sentenced to two years and three months for forgery of document, sentence suspended for two years.
The former agents of PJ Paulo Pereira Cristovao Morgado Leonel Marques and Paulo Marques Bom, who were accused of having tortured Leonor Cipriano in interrogations conducted in Faro PJ, were acquitted.
Thanks for posting this John..it clearly shows the court believes torture took place but was unable to show which officers did it
-
pretty defunct discussion in the context of the mccann case as they werent tortured or ever likely to be by pj or inmates or anyone else....ie the ciprianos convicted murderers case, all appeals thrown out,has nothing to do with anything here.......why people want to connect it is pretty bizarre and irrational at best....desperate and dirty at worst
-
pretty defunct discussion in the context of the mccann case as they werent tortured or ever likely to be by pj or inmates or anyone else....
who started the discussion ...ce
-
So the answer to the OP's question then, is no. Amaral is not off the hook because his conviction stands?
I see this as highly relevant because if he was convicted and sentenced to a year and a half (suspended) for the crime of making false allegations, then how can we be confident that when it came to the McCann case he wasn't, er, making false allegations?
-
So the answer to the OP's question then, is no. Amaral is not off the hook because his conviction stands?
I see this as highly relevant because if he was convicted and sentenced to a year and a half (suspended) for the crime of making false allegations, then how can we be confident that when it came to the McCann case he wasn't, er, making false allegations?
Have you read nothing? Wouldn't it be a good idea to actually go and read up on what Amaral was convicted for? Not the words used by the weird Portuguese system, the actual deeds.
-
I didnt know where to put two links so ive put them here old but very interesting
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-560696/Madeleine-The-damning-case-police-Britains-investigative-reporter.html
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199293/cmhansrd/1992-06-09/Debate-20.html
-
Weird... Yes. There was an article in the Official Diary condemning Mr Amaral to suspension of pension since the judgement is posterior to his retirement..
-
Have you read nothing? Wouldn't it be a good idea to actually go and read up on what Amaral was convicted for? Not the words used by the weird Portuguese system, the actual deeds.
You're not doing a very good job of convincing me though C. Irrespective of the details, we have a man convicted of a crime. Committed during the course of his professional duties no less. If the answer is "go and read the list of excuses" then thanks but no thanks. His trustworthiness is diminished, in my view, until such time as the conviction is overturned.
-
I didnt know where to put two links so ive put them here old but very interesting
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-560696/Madeleine-The-damning-case-police-Britains-investigative-reporter.html
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199293/cmhansrd/1992-06-09/Debate-20.html
you should of put a "warning" on that first link
-
How come amaral was suspended? How did she recieve the black eyes etc
And what happened about her and her brother killing her and his @@@@@ being found .
Ive not followed the case for years ,last i heard the police said she was having sex with her brother when joana caught them so they killed her ????
[/b]
Incest was the motive put forward by the PJ , but the Court rejected it.
However, inspite of there being no motive established, she was still found guilty.....
Amaral was sentenced to 18 months in prison - suspended. He appealed, and his appeal was thrown out.
-
Have you read nothing? Wouldn't it be a good idea to actually go and read up on what Amaral was convicted for? Not the words used by the weird Portuguese system, the actual deeds.
That's extraordinary ! Pretending to have knowledge about a case when none of the inquisitors is capable to read Portuguese and do more than googletranslate and feed on tabloids articles.
Should tattling be amazing under the benediction of the fu...ing to...er of Mrs McCann ?
-
That's extraordinary ! Pretending to have knowledge about a case when none of the inquisitors is capable to read Portuguese and do more than googletranslate and feed on tabloids articles.
Should tattling be amazing under the benediction of the fu...ing to...er of Mrs McCann ?
Amaral is a convicted criminal...of that there can be no argumant
-
Hers another one. It sems the police understand the system. Again the court accepts torture but cannot identify the offices due to lack of evidence
•The Court of Appeal in Lisbon ordered a retrial in the case of Albino Libânio, who was assaulted by prison officers in Lisbon Prison in 2003. The Court granted a request by Albino Libânio’s lawyers for the Portuguese state to be named as a defendant. The decision was made on the grounds that, as his injuries occurred while he was in the care of the prison system, the state should be held liable even if it was impossible to prove which prison officers were responsible for the attack. The original trial had recognized the injuries suffered by Albino Libânio but acquitted all seven prison officers of assault because of lack of evidence proving their responsibility. A new trial date had not been set at the end of the year.
-
This post explains why the officers were acquitted even though torture had taken place..
•On 22 May the Criminal Court of Faro issued its sentence in the case of the torture of Leonor Cipriano. The court recognized that she had been tortured in police custody in 2004, but acquitted all three police officers, claiming that it was impossible to identify exactly who had been responsible. A fourth officer was convicted of giving false testimony and another was convicted of falsifying documents. Leonor Cipriano’s appeal was pending at the end of the year
-
This post explains why the officers were acquitted even though torture had taken place..
•On 22 May the Criminal Court of Faro issued its sentence in the case of the torture of Leonor Cipriano. The court recognized that she had been tortured in police custody in 2004, but acquitted all three police officers, claiming that it was impossible to identify exactly who had been responsible. A fourth officer was convicted of giving false testimony and another was convicted of falsifying documents. Leonor Cipriano’s appeal was pending at the end of the year
A suspect cannot be interviewed unless their lawyer is present so what occurred in Leonor's case since he appears to be absent? Surely all the PJ officers should have been convicted of a conspiracy to conceal a crime? They all covered for each other so jointly they were responsible, it is a very damming indictment of the Portuguese criminal justice system that they were allowed to get away with it. In my opinion it sent out a wholly inappropriate message.
-
A suspect cannot be interviewed unless their lawyer is present so what occurred in Leonor's case since he appears to be absent? Surely all the PJ officers should have been convicted of a conspiracy to conceal a crime? They all covered for each other so jointly they were responsible, it is a very damming indictment of the Portuguese criminal justice system that they were allowed to get away with it. In my opinion it sent out a wholly inappropriate message.
I suspect it is something that happens in police forces the world over.
-
A suspect cannot be interviewed unless their lawyer is present so what occurred in Leonor's case since he appears to be absent? Surely all the PJ officers should have been convicted of a conspiracy to conceal a crime? They all covered for each other so jointly they were responsible, it is a very damming indictment of the Portuguese criminal justice system that they were allowed to get away with it. In my opinion it sent out a wholly inappropriate message.
There doesn't even appear to have been an internal enquiry - (if there was Ive never heard anything about it)
They must know who picked LC at 6.a.m. from the prison - in the absence of the Governor - and who returned her - and who was on duty at the police station that day and what they were doing. They also must know that a lawyer was not present at the time.
The apparent lack of action is absolutely shocking IMO.
-
There doesn't even appear to have been an internal enquiry - (if there was Ive never heard anything about it)
They must know who picked LC at 6.a.m. from the prison - in the absence of the Governor - and who returned her - and who was on duty at the police station that day and what they were doing. They also must know that a lawyer was not present at the time.
The apparent lack of action is absolutely shocking IMO.
If you were interested in this case, you would have brought here original and reliable documents supporting your arguments.
As you obviously don't intend to do it, I can't but infer that your admirable purpose is to discredit the PJ.
-
If you were interested in this case, you would have brought here original and reliable documents supporting your arguments.
As you obviously don't intend to do it, I can't but infer that your admirable purpose is to discredit the PJ.
With all respect Anne, the PJ managed that all by themselves. I don't know why you protect them so, do you really believe they are guiltless??
Is it a case of a few rotten apples??
-
[/b]
Incest was the motive put forward by the PJ , but the Court rejected it.
However, inspite of there being no motive established, she was still found guilty.....
Amaral was sentenced to 18 months in prison - suspended. He appealed, and his appeal was thrown out.
She was found guilty even after a man has been charged ?
-
She was found guilty even after a man has been charged ?
She was found guilty years before.....she was found guilty of perjury also after amarals conviction.....
Youre confusing two different trials/issues
-
04/21/2015 22:15 Four inspectors PJ accused of torture Defense asks for absolution of the inspectors of the PJ of Coimbra.
Ler mais em: http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dcorreia%2Bda%2Bmanha%26biw%3D1366%26bih%3D669&rurl=translate.google.co.uk&sl=pt-BR&u=http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/nacional/portugal/detalhe/inspetores_da_pj_acusados_de_tortura.html&usg=ALkJrhgs8xbC0[Name removed]EIY9ULEEgAjk2iiUevA
The defense asked this Tuesday, the Court of Coimbra, the acquittal of four inspectors of the Judicial Police (PJ), accused of a crime of torture, co-authored, in Figueira da Foz. The four inspectors, three men and a woman, were charged by the Public Prosecutor (MP) of the commission of a crime of torture and other cruel, degrading or inhuman serious, as part of an investigation of a man suspected of drug trafficking, Shaggy, in Figueira da Foz. In closing arguments, the defense lawyer of the four inspectors of the PJ center of the Board stated that, throughout the trial, "no one identified, grazed or lightly, the defendants" as having done what they are accused. The defense pointed out that the victim could not identify any of the crime practice of defendants in the indictment, stating that "there is no direct or indirect evidence" linking the inspectors of the PJ to the alleged assault.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Déjà vu.
I will try to find names.
-
I wonder how long ago the alleged beatings took place?
The problem goes both ways. Innocent people have been bashed around, and guilty people say they were, even if they weren't.
The only solution, IMO, would seem to be to invest in full cctv coverage from the moment they enter the station to the moment they leave.