Was the naming of the arguidos an unnecessary and dumb move?

[Alice Purjorick]

I have always had a problem with the British interpretation of the Portuguese word arguido.  It has become widely accepted that it means official suspect but there is much more to it.  A better definition would be 'defendant'.

Someone suggested earlier that it is the equivalent in UK terms of being interviewed under caution. Arguidos are certainly cautioned as far as I understand prior to being interviewed and only then can their responses be later used in any trial but not if self-incrimitory.

I think we have to be careful before applying generalities to the term arguido.

The Portuguese wikipedia definition of arguido makes for better understanding.

https://pt.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arguido

It also helps to be aware of the procedures associated with being an arguido bearing in mind that a  legal system is based on a mandatory sequence of formally documented steps such that in theory, at least, each decision en route from offence to conviction or acquittal, is circumscribed by legal rules.
In Portugal:
It is mandatory to question a person if there is a founded suspicion they have committed a crime. As the objective is to gain the truth questioning may be ordered with a lesser degree of suspicion.
Questioning may be by a Judge, Criminal Police or Public Prosecutor. The defence lawyer must be informed but it is not mandatory for him to be there except in cases of custodial detention.
The arguido is not obliged to answer and the questions asked at the preliminary stage are of little evidential value.

The arguido has the right of silence; under Portuguese law this is not to his detriment.
He may decide to later waive the right to silence subsequently lying for which he cannot be punished.
The arguido may not under any circumstances make statements under oath as deflection against self incrimination.
An arguido must give details of his identity truthfully.
An arguido is not obliged to help the inquiry in anyway.

In those old fashioned things called Libraries one will commonly a find a reference section. If your librarary is big enough it will have a sub-section on law for European and other States with explanations and so on...

[Brietta]

I have always had a problem with the British interpretation of the Portuguese word arguido.  It has become widely accepted that it means official suspect but there is much more to it.  A better definition would be 'defendant'.

Someone suggested earlier that it is the equivalent in UK terms of being interviewed under caution. Arguidos are certainly cautioned as far as I understand prior to being interviewed and only then can their responses be later used in any trial but not if self-incrimitory.

I think we have to be careful before applying generalities to the term arguido.

The Portuguese wikipedia definition of arguido makes for better understanding.

https://pt.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arguido

I think the fault for any misunderstanding about the arguido status lies firmly with the information printed in the Portuguese media which was picked up by foreign press and relayed to their readers.

[Brietta]

Arguidos folks ... let's try to get back to it.  Thank you

[John]

Making Sergey Malinka an arguido didn't have to be publicly evidenced.  That too was dumb.

Just as making Ricardo Rodrigues, Paulo Ribeiro and José Carlos da Silva arguidos was dumb.

Let me put this in as plain and blunt terms as I can.  If you want help or information from the people of Luz, do you p**s on them first?  It seems OG thinks that is the way to go.

It's a mistake the McCanns also made, IMO.

OG is NOT conducting an exhaustive investigation.  That should have started with the T9.  Epic fail.

I have no confidence that OG could organise a p**s-up in a brewery.  That's IMO.

Please respond to the opening post otherwise comments will be expunged.  TY

[Robittybob1]

I read today that the PJ didn't even have to have evidence against you to become an arguido just suspicion was enough.

[Alice Purjorick]

This may be in the wrong place but Sr Murat was an arguido once upon a time.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/clarifications-corrections/831452/Robert-Murat-Apology-21-July-2017
It looks like the Express has been naughty again. I wonder if coin of the realm exchanged hands?

[John]

I read today that the PJ didn't even have to have evidence against you to become an arguido just suspicion was enough.

Very true Robbie, I think the whole idea behind arguido status is to do two things.

1. To alert an individual that they are a suspect and that the police could well take things further.

2. It is a protection given to a suspected person prior to being formally interviewed and potentially charged with a crime.

[Robittybob1]

Very true Robbie, I think the whole idea behind arguido status is to do two things.

1. To alert an individual that they are a suspect and that the police could well take things further.

2. It is a protection given to a suspected person prior to being formally interviewed and potentially charged with a crime.

But I suppose even with a suspicion tell would need to tell the arguido why they are suspicious.

[John]

But I suppose even with a suspicion tell would need to tell the arguido why they are suspicious.

Detectives work in all sorts of weird and wondrous ways, their agenda is to extract information and ultimately a confession so their tactics are wide and varied.  They might confront an arguido with the evidence as exists or attempt to unsettle them by introducing rogue information in order to elicit a response.

[Alice Purjorick]

Making Sergey Malinka an arguido didn't have to be publicly evidenced.  That too was dumb.

Just as making Ricardo Rodrigues, Paulo Ribeiro and José Carlos da Silva arguidos was dumb.

Let me put this in as plain and blunt terms as I can.  If you want help or information from the people of Luz, do you p**s on them first?  It seems OG thinks that is the way to go.

It's a mistake the McCanns also made, IMO.

OG is NOT conducting an exhaustive investigation. That should have started with the T9.  Epic fail.

I have no confidence that OG could organise a p**s-up in a brewery.  That's IMO.


158

It may help to work backwards with some of this.
The Met have no authority in Portugal. They are merely civilians there.
Any "work" carried out has to be effected by the Portuguese and therefore effected in accordance with Portuguese Law and legal procedures.
If anyone has arguido status conferred on them it will be as a result of:
1 The person concerned asking for it.
2 The PP demanding it.
The arguido is entitled to see any evidence the Inquiry has against them and what potential charges will be.

As an arguido can lie with impunity and OG ostensibly is to discover the truth the two would appear potentially to  be at cross puposes.

Should evidence appear that a crime was committed in Portugal and will be tried in Portugal then Portuguese procedures have to be followed otherwise the case can be nullified.

I often wonder whether the Portuguese reopened the file merely to allow OG some degree of movement. With a closed file they [the Met] would be jiggered when it came to having people questioned.

All IMO of course

[John]

It may help to work backwards with some of this.
The Met have no authority in Portugal. They are merely civilians there.
Any "work" carried out has to be effected by the Portuguese and therefore effected in accordance with Portuguese Law and legal procedures.
If anyone has arguido status conferred on them it will be as a result of:
1 The person concerned asking for it.
2 The PP demanding it.
The arguido is entitled to see any evidence the Inquiry has against them and what potential charges will be.

As an arguido can lie with impunity and OG ostensibly is to discover the truth the two would appear potentially to  be at cross puposes.

Should evidence appear that a crime was committed in Portugal and will be tried in Portugal then Portuguese procedures have to be followed otherwise the case can be nullified.

I often wonder whether the Portuguese reopened the file merely to allow OG some degree of movement. With a closed file they [the Met] would be jiggered when it came to having people questioned.

All IMO of course

I think you raise a very important point ie The Met have no authority in Portugal. They are merely civilians there.

[Robittybob1]

I think you raise a very important point ie The Met have no authority in Portugal. They are merely civilians there.

Same for the PJ when they went to England to do the rogatory interviews.