Onlookers in the public gallery screamed abuse at the mother and uncle of Joana Cipriano as they were ferried to and from the court.
The case, which shocked the nation with its account of incest, murder and desecration, took just three days to be tried. The Public Ministry pressed for jail terms of 24 years for the defendants, who were charged with qualified murder, as well as desecrating and concealing a body.
As the trial opened, both Leonor and João Cipriano, held on remand for over a year, stood silently and without emotion as they heard prosecutor José Pinheiro outline his case. He described João Cipriano as a man who “has contempt for human life, psychopathic tendencies and difficulty in controlling impulses”. Pinheiro also castigated Joana’s mother for her “emotional instability, insensitivity and disregard for other people’s needs”. Only when Pinheiro announced that he was pressing for a 24-year jail term for both defendants did Leonor show emotion, sobbing uncontrollably.
Pinheiro explained why his team was pressing for such a long sentence. “The defendants’ guilt is heightened by their cold and calculating behaviour after their child’s death, as well as the devious manoeuvres they adopted to conceal the crime,” he said.
The trial included key testimony from Joana’s stepfather, António Leandro, who related that Leonor had confided to him that she had had a sexual relationship with her brother. He also told the court that during this conversation, which took place a few days after Joana’s disappearance, at judicial police headquarters, Leonor had admitted that she and her brother had killed the little girl.
A total of 45 witnesses, mostly relatives and villagers, testified in court over a trial period of just three days. Four jurors (one man and three women) and three judges decided the verdict. The opinions of the jurors – a 20-year-old student, a physiotherapist, a library employee and a waitress – carried the same weight as that of the judges.
A key element of the prosecution’s case rests on the fact that the couple dismembered the girl’s corpse. António Leandro, confronted with photographs of tools allegedly used by the couple, said he recognised a saw he had kept at home. In the video taped confession, João Cipriano admitted that the body of the girl was dismembered and placed in a refrigerator . A doctor involved in the case, Albino Santana dos Santos, conceded that body parts, matching the size of a girl of Joana’s height, could have been stuffed inside the appliance.
how much of what is being reported simply isn't true...the tools were supposed to have disappeared, were never found...so how can there be photographs of them...they didnt
how much of what is being reported simply isn't true...the tools were supposed to have disappeared, were never found...so how can there be photographs of them...they didnt
how much of what is being reported simply isn't true...the tools were supposed to have disappeared, were never found...so how can there be photographs of them...they didnt
Aot of work there Carana. Well done 8@??)(
carana, i dont read portuguese and im sure 90 per cent of posters here dont either so please......taThere is always Google translate Red
There is always Google translate Red
We have to use that for your PT language posts.
But I see Carana has translated a good few of them for you.
Must be confusing me with someone else dear.....I am not so sure of that dear
8((()*/
Why are you referring to appeal court documents Carana when you should be referring to the daily reports from the actual trial?
You have to go back to the trial as I have done if you ever going to understand this case. Being able to translate Portuguese is a prerequisite of course.
Blimey Anna, what a collection.....it all proves Leonor and Joao were fitted up.....not.....thanks for all that
You are very welcome ..............Lots more to come yet though
Any real Evidence yet?
Not a bit
Sterling work, Anna.
Still no Evidence.
The European Court is going to have a fit when they consider this dreadful Miscarriage of Justice. And only one Portuguese Judge is going to come out of this with any honour.
Does anyone know his name? The Judge who voted that Leonor Cipriano is innocent.
Is this the one.....Santos Carvalho, one of four members of the Supreme Court of Justice called to decide on the future of Leonor and John Cyprian, convicted in the first instance by the death of joana, wanted to absolve the girl's mother of the crime of murder.
This judge is convinced that "there was no direct evidence, circumstantial only, even with regard to the victim dying"
Thank you. No where near enough attention is paid to him and his opinion.
Is this the one.....Santos Carvalho, one of four members of the Supreme Court of Justice called to decide on the future of Leonor and John Cyprian, convicted in the first instance by the death of joana, wanted to absolve the girl's mother of the crime of murder.
This judge is convinced that "there was no direct evidence, circumstantial only, even with regard to the victim dying"
Only an opinion, fortunately the other three supremo judges came to the opposite opinion and rightly so. Leonor is a murderer by her own free admission.
You always try to protect the person you love. HE HAD NOTHING to lose by saying that he was already convicted. He wanted to try and SAVE the women he loved.....simple.
So still an astonishing lack of any real evidence
Only an opinion, fortunately the other three supremo judges came to the opposite opinion and rightly so. Leonor is a murderer by her own free admission.
Ticks can be common place in some areas. I once had to deal with an infestation. They climb up the walls and get everywhere. And there were never any dead bodies in my house.
Petrol is known to deter them.
Although God know why such a fuss should be made about this. Just another piece of circumstantial evidence that has no basis in fact.
Ticks can be common place in some areas. I once had to deal with an infestation. They climb up the walls and get everywhere. And there were never any dead bodies in my house.
Petrol is known to deter them.
Although God know why such a fuss should be made about this. Just another piece of circumstantial evidence that has no basis in fact.
That is very true Eleanor. fresh meat, Pigs will also attract them, or any animal really. When we were in Tangiers they washed the floor tiles with what smelled like paraffin
My understanding of this is that Leandro's mother (who incidentally testified that Leonor always kept her house clean and well kept), having presumably stopped to visit on her way back from whatever "SIC" is, was the one who noticed that there were bugs (whatever they actually were) on the door of the house and on a pillar and suggested to Leonor to go and buy some "creolina" to kill them. If "creolina" is creosote, I'm not aware that there are colourless varieties (although there may be). If not, it would seem unlikely to suggest splashing it inside the house. I have yet to find an indication in her testimony that the area involved the inside of the house. According to her stepmother, Leonor went shopping for some but couldn't find any and bought petrol instead. This petrol was only bought on 18 September. And it was the stepmother who used it on the outside of the house with a mop of some kind.
A testemunha AA5, mãe de II, declarou que a CC esteve em sua casa desde 5ª feira a domingo, dia 12 de Setembro, indo para a Figueira com a mãe pelas 18 h. Nesse dia à noite (já estava deitada) o II telefonou-lhe a perguntar se estava lá a CC, tendo a testemunha respondido que a CC tinha ido com a mãe, ao que o II a informou que a CC tinha desaparecido. Disse ainda a testemunha que a arguida BB tinha a casa sempre limpa e tratava bem da casa. Num dia, depois de lá ter ido a SIC, reparou que havia carraças à porta de casa e num pilar e disse à BB para ela ir comprar creolina para as matar. A BB comprou petróleo, dizendo que não havia creolina, e foi a própria testemunha que procedeu à limpeza, no exterior da casa, com a esfregona.
Right again Carana ,but Leonor did clean indoors with dishwasher liquid and water before child disappeared it should be in the news statements
The Faro PJ squad didn't examine the house until 22 September as far as I can work out (she disappeared on the 12 September, although it's often recorded as the 13th, as that's when the official report was filed).
Even if detergent had been used on areas that kids would frequently touch... why would that imply a post-massacre cleanup that no visitor to the house seemed to have noticed?
So no Evidence, only Opinions. And not even unanimous.
And what's free about admission under torture?
For the last time please stop posting falsehoods Eleanor. Leonor freely confessed to the murder the very first time she came before the magistrates which was weeks before the torture incident. Try and look at the events objectively as Anna and Carana have done.
I haven't had the time to look through this entire thread yet but I must commend the research so far.
However, in the final analysis, Leonor did freely confess to bludgeoning Joana's head against the house wall in what can only be assumed was some sort of spontaneous rage over some event. It has been alleged that she saw some sort of incestual sexual encounter between her mother and her uncle and also suggested that the encounter was over the measly €10 change from the shopping which Joana probably wanted for the fair. None of this can be proven however.
Maybe someone will explain to me why an innocent mother would admit to such a horrible act if innocent?
For the last time please stop posting falsehoods Eleanor. Leonor freely confessed to the murder the very first time she came before the magistrates which was weeks before the torture incident. Try and look at the events objectively as Anna and Carana have done.
I haven't had the time to look through this entire thread yet but I must commend the research so far.
However, in the final analysis, Leonor did freely confess to bludgeoning Joana's head against the house wall in what can only be assumed was some sort of spontaneous rage over some event. It has been alleged that she saw some sort of incestual sexual encounter between her mother and her uncle and also suggested that the encounter was over the measly €10 change from the shopping which Joana probably wanted for the fair. None of this can be proven however.
Maybe someone will explain to me why an innocent mother would admit to such a horrible act if innocent?
There could be lots of reasons, John, depending on the interrogation methods used... You have your conviction, which is fine by me. But what makes you think that intimidation and/or beatings couldn't make someone "voluntarily" "confess" to something that they hadn't actually done?
Shocked and horrified. How can you post such falsehoods of which you admit there is no proof.
So now it is the change from 10 Euros?
You should be ashamed of yourself on a Forum that purports to Justice.
Shut me up by all means. I wouldn't really care. But so long as I am allowed to post on this Forum then I am going to go on saying that this was a Miscarriage of Justice.
You of all people could have had a really good one here.
She was a free woman up until that hearing and could return home every night. There was no evidence of any beatings until much later.
If you continue to post false information Eleanor that's exactly what will happen...your choice.
Its facts and evidence we are interested in and not semantics.
She was a free woman up until that hearing and could return home every night. There was no evidence of any beatings until much later.
What false information have I posted? My choice is to say what I think. Only you can ban me. So the choice is yours.
You mentioned this before. I haven't found anything to substantiate that. Where did you get that from?
I have found that the other 7 arguidos in this case were allowed to go home under caution, but I haven't found anything to substantiate that Leonor and João had that privilege as of 21 Sept.
Its all there in the daily rags. Leonor was allowed home up until her first appearance before the examining magistrate. She a police guard outside her house supposedly for her own protection.
Its all there in the daily rags. Leonor was allowed home up until her first appearance before the examining magistrate. She a police guard outside her house supposedly for her own protection.
Could you provide the links to the articles in the daily rags in question? I thought that we were supposed to try to back up assertions as far as possible.
Explain this Eleanor?
26 September 2004
However , Joana's mother , Leonor Cipriano , who was heard between 21:30 and about 00:00 , came to confess to the murder of her daughter . The woman however justified that it was an accident , saying that she had given a slap to the child who had hit her head on a wall, falling unconscious.
Leonor Cipriano said to have been bewildered and panicked at the prospect of killing her daughter , so decided to wrap the girl's body in a cloth and put her in a plastic bag . She then asked the help of her brother to dispose of the body of her own daughter , which she said came to pass at a site in the vicinity of the house.
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/nacional/atualidade/mae-confessa-morte-da-filha-por-acidente
25 sept 2004 - THIS MOTHER SHOULD BE DEAD
The alleged murderers (mother and uncle) Joan were conducted yesterday afternoon at the Court of Portimão to be present at court for criminal prosecution, and was greeted by hundreds of angry people who had gathered at the site. "Assassins" was the word shouted in unison by the popular indignation while the two suspects went through the doors of the building under heavy police escort.
The interrogation of the child's uncle , John Cipriano , has ended after 20.00 and will result in the confession of crime by this , according to a source close to the process. The individual had spent the night at the Prison of Faro.
The judge then heard the child's mother , Leonor Cipriano , who spent the night in the dungeons of the Judicial Police of Faro. The process leading to the implementation of coercive measures dragged into the night .
The two detainees were subject to major security measures by the PSP , which highlighted about 30 officers to the scene, including two dozen members of the Body of Intervention . The arrival of detainees , which was scheduled for 10:00 am, just came to check up around 15:00 , when they were still engaged in many popular place to see up close the two alleged perpetrators of the murder that shocked the country
The authorities were able , however , to fool most people concentrated at the Court . While a mobile car entered the garage at high speed , attracting general attention , the mother and uncle of Joana were sent to the front door , surrounded by members of the Body of Intervention PSP . Thus , individuals were able to escape the popular anger .
During this time , the road around the Court has truly become chaotic , with tailbacks to accumulate in the adjacent streets . Nevertheless , many people insisted on passing car at the site to see the awesome police apparatus placed there .
Many motorists even ended up parking the car nearby, joining the cluster of people waiting for the arrival of suspected death of Joan .
MORE THAN A DEATH
For Maria Amelia , one of the people who was at the Court of Portimão , " that mother deserves more than death " , stressing that "it is the fault of the rulers , since there must be popular justice " . And he confesses : "I always suspected the fault of this woman , because no one can be so cold before the disappearance of a child ."
Beside her , a lady gave an draws near : " They did what they did and are still protected by the authorities , something that they do not deserve ."
John Pacheco was the other popular that showed " shocked and disgusted " with the crime , because the girl knew by sight , by the time she attended the School of Sales in Portimão.
" She was and uncle were to be hanged , if indeed done what it says " , defended in turn Anthony Hunter . Despite his already advanced age , this popular collateral " have never in my life seen such a shocking case like this ."
In the crowd there were also those who still refuse to believe that any mother would be committing an act of that gravity. It was the case of Joseph Francis , who claimed still expect " everything was confirmed ."
Everywhere , the voices that were heard could not be more critical of the alleged perpetrators of the crime , insisting the majority of the popular need for stiffer penalties for such cases and even popular justice .
The many hundreds of people who were at the Court began to demobilize the evening , when the doors of the court were closed and police contingent was raised .
STEPFATHER WAS HEARD BY THE JUDICIAL
" Nobody knows what I 'm going through . Still do not believe this is happening to me , "he said yesterday, the CM , the stepfather of Joan Little , the ex- Faro Directorate of the Judicial Police ( PJ ) which was heard by inspectors SRCB all morning . António Leandro , who abandoned the premises of the PJ moments after his partner , Leonor Cipriano be taken in a civilian car to the Court of Portimão , refused to provide more statements about the case , though he admits not believe that the woman is implicated in the murder. For the stepfather of the murdered girl , the two detained only uncle of the child would be able to practice the act , as it possessed criminal records , including attempted murder of a family . According to PJ , the possible involvement of Leandro in girl's death is so far away .
LEONOR exonerate BROTHER TRIED
ww MAGDALENE BENTES
During the first interrogation in the Directorate of Faro PJ , Leonor Cipriano have tried to exonerate her brother , responsible for the effect her own husband . The CM was found that the woman will initially said the stepfather to carry out the body of Joan outside the housing version that will easily have been cleared by the PJ as António Leandro was in a cafe in the village during the period in which it was committed the crime . Leonor and her brother are, moreover , the only two occupants of the home when Joan arrived on the night of the 12th, coming from shopping. In possession of the girl would not have more than ten euros , an amount required by his uncle , who fall on suspicion of having been the main author of the aggressions inflicted on the lowest that have been removed from the scene lifeless . This is at least a strong suspicion Inspectors Regional Chamber Against Gangsterism ( SRCB ) the PJ in Faro , after detecting traces inside the house of the action taken by the mother and uncle .
Doubts remain however until the discovery of the corpse , when it will also be possible to determine the possible use of bladed weapons , which could have caused serious injury to the lowest since according to PJ , the intention of the two murderers have been the same for kill the child . At issue was the attempt on the part of both economies to extort the girl who used to receive money from relatives , especially the paternal grandparents .
Yesterday , inspectors of the PJ in Faro SRCB continued to hear people near the small Joan since the investigations , classified as very complex , will continue until the full investigation of the case.
25 Sept 2004 - MOTHER OF JOAN ON PROBATION
Leonor Cipriano, the suspected death of their daughter Joana Guerreiro, 8 years, will remain in custody, according to the decision of the court of Portimão enacted in the early hours of Saturday. His brother, João Cipriano, is obligated to periodic presentations to the authorities.
The two alleged murderers, accused of killing Joanna, which occurred on September 12, in the village of Figueira, near Portimão, the Court left the premises at about 2:45 a.m., where they were heard from the evening of Friday.
Joan's body remains undiscovered, the authorities have resumed the search operations this Saturday.
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/ultima-hora/mae-de-joana-em-prisao-preventiva
I have removed that article Carana as there is far too much material to clutter this thread. I think the best thing is for me to compile a list of articles in the lead up to the arrest and detention of Leonor Cipriano so that readers can see for themselves how it all developed.
We have to be guided by the events which occurred Eleanor. I understand your passion for this case but we must stick to the facts.
Ok. It might be useful to distinguish between the media frenzy prior to the trial, what was actually reported during the trial and to compare that with the official documents.
Again posters want to believe there is evidence but to quote a tabloid story as supporting evidence is bizarre. it just shows again there is no real evidence
For people who think this was an unsafe conviction for one or both ofthe parties, what do you belive happened?
- leonor is innocent, her brother killed joana
- leonor is innocent but knows her brother killed joana and is complicit in covering up
-leonor is innocent, her brother sold joana, with or without her covering for him
- leonor is complicit with her brother in agreeing to sell joana
- leonor could well be guilty alone in killing joana
-leonor could well be guilty along with her brother in killing joana
- joana was abducted
- another family member or friend abducted or killed her
Hard to tell categorically with the plethora of stories and changed versions they gave over the years and some of the witness statements
>@@(*&)
It is a difficult one RB. That's why I am sifting through the evidence to find a tell-tale ,without the help of the hate that was stirred up in the people by police information leaks at the time. They were already condemned before they went to trial.
thanks Anna, appreciate all the hard work youve done....just trying to think of how many parents arrested charged and convicted for the murder/accidental killingharm/that lead to death of their kids were innocent in the end.....its an extremely rare occurrence...so rare I dont think theres enough decimal places when writing a percentage....still......
Well if you take her own admission, her attempts to exonerate her brother and all the circumstantial evidence I am not in the least surprised that the jury unanimously found her guilty.
Joana's body lies somewhere and that for me is the really sad fact in this case. No wonder Gonçalo Amaral pays homage to her every year on 12 September.
Thank you for that, RB , I see where your coming from, but there are so many missing children and nobody arrested, because there is no proof of what became of them to charge anyone.
Okay, I am out. Sorry if I got overheated about what I consider to be bordering on the obscene.
But i was talking about people who have been arrested.....and this case is not one of a missing child with no suspects arrests charges or convictions
Hmmm. I thought we were going to try to establish facts?
I'm still trying to find any probative evidence that this child died.
OK Carana,
She went missing 12 sep 2004 at around 8.30 pm when she was last seen near the church with a shopping bag
I'm still trying to find any probative evidence that this child died.Have you found not probative evidence ?
So they said though....any evidence for this? No....
This fact is where she was last seen by an independent witness....
Have you found not probative evidence ?
So they said though....any evidence for this? No....
This fact is where she was last seen by an independent witness....
That is very true RB She possibly didn't get that far, on her way home, but a witness none less
Walking towards home, according to a lady having a ciggie out her window.
So?
So?
Whether or not she was kidnapped or killed / murdered by family members, someone seeing her walking towards home doesn't prove that she actually got back home. The only other detail that she might have done seems to be this uncorroborated statement about shoes.
What about children who are kidnapped on their way to school? Does one witness who saw a kid on the road to school prove that they actually got there? Or children walking to a bus stop? Would one testimony prove that they actually got on the bus?
So you are saying that the café owner who was an independent witness could be lying too, including all the independent witnesses at the trialI never said any such thing, perhaps you misunderstood...
I never said any such thing, perhaps you misunderstood...
She was LAST SEEN at 8.30 I stand corrected, Why didn't you just correct me?
----
OK Carana,
She went missing 12 sep 2004 at around 8.30 pm when she was last seen near the church with a shopping bag
----
I did correct you.....in my later post
I dont know if those were your words or someone elses but I did say they werent right.....sorry, no offense.....
My fault I think..Sorry 8()-000(
Reports vary as to when she went out / was last seen. However, the independent witnesses seem to agree more or less.
The lady at the shop said that she saw her at around 20:20 / 20:30
A testemunha NN, proprietária da "Pastelaria ...", declarou que no dia 12 de Setembro a CC apareceu na pastelaria, pelas 8h 20m / 8 h 30m, a comprar um pacote de leite e duas latas de atum.
and the lady at the window saw her walking home at around 20:30 / 20:40.
Witness AA3, at around 8.30/8.40 p.m., saw CC [Joana Cipriano] walking up the stairs near the market, into the direction of her home, with a bag, a sign that she was returning from shopping (and we know that she did the shopping, from the deposition of witness NN). This witness, who was smoking at the window, stayed at the window for some time and verified that there was no movement on location, nor did she see any cars, or heard any screams. This means that, according to the rules of experience, and given the fact that the route is short, what is normal is that the minor returned home.
Whichever way she went to or headed back from that errand, it's roughly a 5-minute walk each way, plus waiting time in the café/shop.
Little MariLuz (Spain) disappeared on her way to/from buying a packet of crisps in her own village and never got home.
Whichever way she went to or headed back from that errand, it's roughly a 5-minute walk each way, plus waiting time in the café/shop.
Little MariLuz (Spain) disappeared on her way to/from buying a packet of crisps in her own village and never got home.
I think it is 5 minutes walking for an adult, not sure about a child. She left the café more than 5 mins before she was seen at church. I need to check the times again, something not right
Maybe check why a mother sends her eight yr old child to walk 500 metres around this part and that part two hours after the sun has gone down! and then doesnt miss her for ages and then doesnt report her missing for ages......maybe thats "normal" in some parts....though
When I was that age, I used to walk a mile to the village school, but that was well over 60 years ago @)(++(*
I do believe, it was said nothing like this had ever happened in Figueira
Or PDL!!!
I know what you mean though....times are not the same though are they and she was sent out alone in the dark, dont small villages have perverts?
Maybe check why a mother sends her eight yr old child to walk 500 metres around this part and that part two hours after the sun has gone down! and then doesnt miss her for ages and then doesnt report her missing for ages......maybe thats "normal" in some parts....though
So all the circumstantial and other evidence in this case is all false?
joanna was abducted?
As for cakes wasnt it stated somewhere leonor sent joana out for hot cakes at some ungodly hour all the time.....Hello? yes? No?
Right or wrong? Never mind about that......
What substantial evidence to convict for murder are you referring too, RB ? I never referred to any substantial evidence, I just find it hard to believe anyone is convicted in no evidence at all....there is the circumstantial that the police out together, some of the so called circumstangial could be deemed physical evidence the child returned home, ie the food purchased, all her shoes owned being there, and there is the matter of the two confessions and also the matter of the third in a letter she wrote, that one was not regarding murder but agreeing to selling her child which is different
I don't know whether the child was abducted, sold or murdered, or by whom.
Do you know something I don't ? No
Does sending a child for cakes,(which I must have missed) make you a murderer ? No, never even intimated this
The child was well looked after and very fond of her mum according to witnesses, but even if that was not the case, it is not evidence for murder, or do you think it is ? No again
I would be grateful, if you could direct me to the items I have missed My only reason for mentioning the stupid cakes is because of the last paragraph in your last post to me, saying "and before you ask abou the cakes", the cakes never crossed my mind and I wasnt going to say anything about them being bought or what time, but seeing as you brought it up I mentioned anecdotal evidence, sic Cristovaos book on the case, that Leonor had a habit of sending Joana out at 3-4am to buy hot cakes!
So all the circumstantial and other evidence in this case is all false?
joanna was abducted?
As for cakes wasnt it stated somewhere leonor sent joana out for hot cakes at some ungodly hour all the time.....Hello? yes? No?
Right or wrong? Never mind about that......
I'm not sure I'd count on Cristovão's book as being particularly accurate. It's not mentioned at all in the baker's statement.
I am sorry if I have offended you in some way RB This is where you mentioned the cakes
The rest can be looked up
Im not saying its true or not..its anecdotal, it might be, and not everything gets into police statements all the time
Fair enough, but the prosecution was highlighting every possible negative aspect, and that doesn't appear anywhere as far as I can see. Reading through the (untranslated) statements, I can't find anything to suggest that Leonor mistreated her. She ran the odd errand, helped around the house and helped look after the two younger ones, but also had friends and played. All of the witnesses who were asked said that they'd had never seen Leonor smacking her, nor heard rumours to that effect. In Leandro's (press) interview, he said he'd never even see her shout at her.
Fair enough, but the prosecution was highlighting every possible negative aspect, and that doesn't appear anywhere as far as I can see. Reading through the (untranslated) statements, I can't find anything to suggest that Leonor mistreated her. She ran the odd errand, helped around the house and helped look after the two younger ones, but also had friends and played. All of the witnesses who were asked said that they'd had never seen Leonor smacking her, nor heard rumours to that effect. In Leandro's (press) interview, he said he'd never even see her shout at her.
Thats what prosecution teams do......and defence teams respond likewise.....i dont think the issue is really that she was a badly mistreated kid.....
Since the Incest claims were unproven, one might wonder why Leonor suddenly took to beating the child to death.Well if you are going to bring it up, unproven doesnt mean untrue.....not that I have any opinion on the allegations...but there might be motive there.....IF true
Well if you are going to bring it up, unproven doesnt mean untrue.....not that I have any opinion on the allegations...but there might be motive there.....IF true
Why should Kate McCann refute the allegation? She isn't beholden to answer to you.I endorse Eleanors statement. Tbh, I thought that Cristavao had been indicted on seven Criminal Charges ... and they are pretty nasty ones IIRC. But I will accept five, because I totally trust Eleanor.
The allegation is in his book. It is he who needs to prove it. But since it has gone absolutely no where then I think we can discard it, don't you?
He hasn't been indicted on five Criminal Charges because he is a nice and honest man.
I endorse Eleanors statement. Tbh, I thought that Cristavao had been indicted on seven Criminal Charges ... and they are pretty nasty ones IIRC. But I will accept five, because I totally trust Eleanor.
Not the sort of man you would chose as a pal.
Actually, Sadie, you could be right. It could be seven charges. I was just being conservative. And no one is going to accuse me of lying if I under estimate.
And Yes, they are all nasty charges.
The Public Prosecutor formally accused, on 14 December, the ex-vice-president of Sporting, Paulo Pereira Cristovao, seven crimes, among which circumvents qualified, money laundering, embezzlement, complainant qualified slandering devassa through computerised and illegitimate access qualified.Nice bloke, eh , anna !
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/sport/sporting/paulo-pereira-cristovao-acusado
Soooo... Still no body, no motive, no weapons, no probative forensic evidence, no cctv, a "voluntary reconstruction", a few negative points in the few translated testimonies, many (non-translated) comments mainly stating that Leonor had never been known to have even shouted at her.
That's it... to get convicted for life?
What happened to Joana and where is she, dead or potentially alive?
Soooo... Still no body, no motive, no weapons, no probative forensic evidence, no cctv, a "voluntary reconstruction", a few negative points in the few translated testimonies, many (non-translated) comments mainly stating that Leonor had never been known to have even shouted at her.
That's it... to get convicted for life?
What happened to Joana and where is she, dead or potentially alive?
I agree that Joana was likely abducted on the way home.
I read Johns articles .he's doing a good job there ! I already have the translated ones saved with many other news articles however.
I think it is highly unlikely that Joana is alive and I am sure she must have been apprehended on the backroad home.
The village was seething on that particular day due to the fair activities. Not an environment that any potential abductor would relish. Too many eyes staring!
Not quite irrespective of the wishful thinking. No body but plenty of false trails offered by her uncle João as to where her remains were discarded, not exactly the actions of an innocent man. Then there are the missing tools testified to by the murdered girl's stepfather and the presence of all her footwear in the family home. Finally, not forgetting the evidence of a neighbour who saw Joanna on her return journey carrying her shopping and last but not least we have the confession of the mother on her first appearance before the investigating magistrate. All together a sorry mess and most certainly not the actions of a loving mother whose daughter had simply disappeared.
All we need now to conclude this sorry tale is to know what exactly did the murderous twosome do with Joana's remains? Was she fed to the pigs, buried somewhere or sent in the boot of a car to a breakers yard in Spain to be crushed?
I haven't had a chance to get back into the newspaper articles Anna but I will do so over the next few days. I want to make everything available in English so that readers can see for themselves the build up to the trial and the trial evidence itself.
I believe it is about time the myths in this case were dispelled for once and for all regardless of the language barrier.
I haven't had a chance to get back into the newspaper articles Anna but I will do so over the next few days. I want to make everything available in English so that readers can see for themselves the build up to the trial and the trial evidence itself.
I believe it is about time the myths in this case were dispelled for once and for all regardless of the language barrier.
Not quite irrespective of the wishful thinking. No body but plenty of false trails offered by her uncle João as to where her remains were discarded, not exactly the actions of an innocent man. Then there are the missing tools testified to by the murdered girl's stepfather and the presence of all her footwear in the family home. Finally, not forgetting the evidence of a neighbour who saw Joanna on her return journey carrying her shopping and last but not least we have the confession of the mother on her first appearance before the investigating magistrate. All together a sorry mess and most certainly not the actions of a loving mother whose daughter had simply disappeared.
All we need now to conclude this sorry tale is to know what exactly did the murderous twosome do with Joana's remains? Was she fed to the pigs, buried somewhere or sent in the boot of a car to a breakers yard in Spain to be crushed?
I don't quite understand the purpose of this forum. You state that you were a victim of a miscarriage of justice, yet you don't seem to be open to the idea that this case may have also been a miscarriage of justice.
Why not?
I'm well aware that people sometimes say that their child has been kidnapped to hide a death due to abuse or whatever. However, in the case of Joana Cipriano, I can't find anything that would substantiate that.
If your Portuguese contacts are willing to translate, perhaps you could ask them to translate the witness statements retained by the Supreme Court before pre-trial media speculation?
Just a thought.
Miscarriages of justice happen in every country. Hopefully, more modern police and prosecution procedures have reduced them, or are in the process of trying to.
They do
But you didnt answer the previous post
Arent you forgetting them agreeing to sell their daughter? And then passing it off as an abduction? Do you consider every single confession of Leonor and her brothers as bogus? Is there any statement by them that refutes ALL confessions?
Do you honestly believe someone would be sent to jail for life on NO evidence? Well, its not life for Leonor she will be out soon
I'm aware that stories have changed over time. How much of that may be due to beating or psychological games? How much may be due to lawyers' advice? I don't know.
For a long time, I just assumed that they were guilty of the gruesome tale. It was only when I started to examine the so-called evidence that I began to wonder what on earth the evidence actually was.
And that's where I'm at. What evidence is there?
Beatings? Psyche games? Lawyers' advice? To produce a different version time after time? How many different confessions does anyone, suspects or police need? If Joana was abducted none of them would have tried to pin the blame on each other! IMO
Something rotten in the state of Denmark here as they say....
That might depend on what you'd been through during interrogations. If the "interviews" * had been recorded on video, I might be less sceptical.
* Not just "interviews", but the entire process from when they were taken in to when they were taken out.
IFFFF CCTV had been part of PJ questioning procedures, it would have presumably been relatively easy to prove who was lying.
Sorry but youre still ignoring the issue if multiple and different content confessions
I'm not ignoring them. What isn't clear to me is the circumstances in which they were obtained.circumstances?
circumstances?Nothing about this case is normal Red.
why would any circumstance change a confession time and time again....is there a specific type that was wanted? It makes no sense to me...leonor made a confession to the judge in sept 04....she then alledgedly made another one under duress n october and then two years later made another...was that the last one? Her brother made at least two different nes didnt he?
this is not normal
Can you please show a link or direction of these confessions made by Leonor, because the only one I know of was a statement made by them both on the advice of Leonors lawyer to shorten the sentence, but it was thrown out of court, because Joao denied writing it. Joao did confess to murder (confession by film of him demonstrating how he disposed of the body) I would greatly appreciate direction to the confessions by Leonor that you know of .anna
anna
Torture was used on Leonor. was it also used on Joao but it has been kept hidden?
Nothing to do with this case can be trusted because of
1) the torture. So called evidence gained from torture is NOT evidence
2) the fact that the lead detectives both are dicey, it seems. Amaral having been convicted of perjury (lying) by the courts. Cristavao allegedly due to be up in Court on seven really nasty changes. Of course, he is innocent until proven guilty, but also allegedly he was in trouble with the PJ previously and relieved of his position. Please correct me if I am wrong on this.
3) Disinformation put about, deriding Leonor and Joao, which was effectively propaganda designed to denigrade them before the case
4) One of the judges was vehemently against the court ruling
5) The defending Lawyer was a mate of Amarals
6) The defending Lawyer seemingly was not charged with carrying drugs.
Perhaps Grade was charged? But surely he would have been struck off had he been found guilty.
7) Cristavao made big money writing a book about this case. Both detectives made mega money writing a book about the Madeleine case too.
Plus several other things.
If Joao is a drug addict, even without any real torture, he would be likely to respond in any way asked ... with the provision of drugs ... only my thoughts, I hasten to add
î
I've yet to see what concrete evidence this case was based on...
Do you know many innocent people who admit to beating their daughter to death?
Do you know many innocent people who admit to beating their daughter to death?
And this is without being beaten up during interrogation:
Leonor Cipriano wasn't beaten up before she confessed before the examining magistrate. Have you not yet learned this?
She told Leandro that she had been, although when asked, he said that he hadn't noticed any bruising on her face or arms. He said that he and others had also been beaten whenever they were interrogated by the Faro PJ. João also said he was regularly beaten. On the balance of probabilities, I don't see why she would have been spared.
Even if she hadn't, there are lots of other ways to exert some form of coercion, including bluffing about evidence, or that the other person being interrogated (João) had insisted she'd done it.
If it's true that they both had a below average IQ, it wouldn't be difficult to manipulate confessions out of them.
A bit of wishful thinking on your behalf Carana. Lets keep to the facts eh?
I have done. Leandro stated in court that Leonor had said that she'd only confessed because she'd been beaten. The beatings that Leandro and others said that they'd been subjected to were in his press interview two years after the events.
A lot of neutral-to-positive witness statements at the trial weren't translated, and there were a lot more of those than the negative ones.
I think there were, Anna. I could be wrong, but my understanding is that the Supreme Court reproduced the original testimonies. The media only seem to have reported the negative ones.
A total of 45 witnesses, mostly relatives and villagers, testified in court over a trial period of just three days.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2977.0
the 45 witness are in the 2006 appeal and I thought that some of the statements of Leandro's family (at least) were different (remember the shoes and house washing floors details)
The request for appeal 2009 had much better statements. Could that be the fact that the previous threats were no longer actively involved ?
(I'm sure that I had an earlier appeal than the Supreme Court ruling... but I can't find it anywhere.)
By Supreme Court, I'm going off this (2006):
06P363
Nº Convencional: JSTJ000
Relator: RODRIGUES DA COSTA
Descritores: HOMICÍDIO
OCULTAÇÃO DE CADÁVER
PROFANAÇÃO DE CADÁVER
JÚRI
DOCUMENTAÇÃO DA PROVA
VÍCIOS
FUNDAMENTAÇÃO
RECONSTITUIÇÃO NATURAL
DOLO EVENTUAL
MEDIDA DA PENA
Nº do Documento: SJ200604200003635
Data do Acordão: 20/04/2006
Votação: MAIORIA COM 1 DEC VOT E 1 VOT VENC
Texto Integral: S
Privacidade: 1
Meio Processual: REVISTA.
Decisão: CONCEDIDA PARCIALMENTE A REVISTA.
The neutral-to-postive witness statements that I was referring to are in that 2006 ruling.
The 2009 case was the torture trial, I believe.
http://iscte.pt/~apad/ACED_juristas/maddietrab_ficheiros/Acordao%20Leonor%20Cipriano%20contra%20Goncalo%20e%20outros.%2022Maio2009.pdf
Do you have any memory of an earlier appeal (i.e. prior to the 2006 Supreme Court one)? From what I remember, it was rejected... I must have found it after I'd read the SC one as I remember being confused because the initials used to designate various witnesses / protagonists weren't the same, e.g. CC wasn't Joana, but either Leonor or João. It was clearly the same case, though.
Sorry no I don't, but I will have a look. You did have a mix up with the names given to witnesses, but I thought that was from the mccannfiles, or else you found the 2009 appeal request. I will post it soon
In the mean time some interesting reading
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pt&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fpontedosor.blogspot.co.uk%2F2005%2F03%2Fonde-est-joana-cipriano_29.html
Thanks. I'll read that.
I've based comments on the witness statements on the 2006 Supreme Court ruling (as the original trial isn't online), as far as I can remember. I DID have a question about MM, and that seems to be a mistake by whoever chose those initials to replace real names, as they were two people designated by the same initials. That is not at all related to the appeal case which I can no longer find.
I am still searching the Courts but can find no earlier appeal than 2006, but will continue trying
There wasn't any other appeal.