Author Topic: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!  (Read 147091 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online John

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1245 on: April 17, 2014, 02:40:21 AM »
Joao confession 2009 appeal
"Statement
I undersigned CC, prisoner no. 282 470 000 the Prison at Carregueira, I confess that I have tried to sell my niece BB.
To be true I sign this confession.

Sintra 18, may 2009
CC".

IMO. He waited until Leonor's confession had been accepted and then he denied signing it (as he always did...he chickened out at the last minute and left his sister to take the blame) and it was thrown out of court.
This Appeal was meant to have their sentence reduced!

The appeal is easily found on the internet.

I have some sympathy with that Anna.  João got a shorter sentence in the end but I think he was the instigator of it all.  Hopefully it will all be revealed some day what happened to that poor wee lass.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed and an exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Fern

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1246 on: May 17, 2014, 06:01:41 PM »
The jury were right to convict them, the only bit that is still unknown by us is who was the instigator and who did what?  In her last effort to clear the way for her parole Leonor put the blame firmly at brother João's door.  It would be interesting to know what he has to say about that.

I fully agree with you John, both as guilty as each other.

My understanding is that any 'beating' Leonor may have received was initiated AFTER her vile confession rather than to obtain a confession.


Offline Carana

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1247 on: May 17, 2014, 08:52:17 PM »
I fully agree with you John, both as guilty as each other.

My understanding is that any 'beating' Leonor may have received was initiated AFTER her vile confession rather than to obtain a confession.

At first, I'd assumed that they were probably guilty, based on translated articles which seemed to substantiate it, what appeared to be a translation of the ruling in the case, and the sad fact that sometimes families do cry abduction when the reality is different. However, in this case... Hmm.

A first point is that a physical beating is not the only means of extracting a confession or a "reconstruction". Some may be valid, others not. Only the "reconstruction" was allowed to be shown to the court, but there is no evidence as to what conditions led up to that.

There was someone who used to post here who has sadly left. In his absence, here is what I find to be useful background reading:


Confessions of a forensic psychologist
Why do people admit to crimes they never committed? Bob Woffinden meets Gisli Gudjonsson, whose pioneering studies changed the face of law

    Bob Woffinden   
    The Guardian, Tuesday 17 December 2002 02.17 GMT   
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/dec/17/law.ukcrime


There was no evidence of any substance that could indicate whether the child had ever got home that evening, let alone had suffered the alleged fate. There was no forensic evidence whatsoever to substantiate the theory.

I find it curious how the tone of the coverage changed the day that a coordinator-who-must-not-be-named took charge of the case and within days the "culprits" were banged up. I also find it curious that many of the neutral-to-positive witness statements in the trial summary were never translated. Odd, that.

By the time the case came to court, the country had been convinced of the horrific PJ theory and were baying for blood.

Yes, there have been varying versions over time, but these were people who'd only had 3-4 years of education and would have been dependent on the advice of a never-ending sequence of pro-bono lawyers.

IMO, this case should never have even gone to court, but it did.

In the meantime, there is still a missing little girl whose fate remains unknown.




Online John

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1248 on: May 18, 2014, 04:58:11 AM »
Oh come on Carana, you can do better than that? They were both in it up to their necks, had they been innocent victims of an abduction they wouldn't have come out with the sob stories they did nor would they have resorted to recriminations and blaming each other.  As I stated before, the only part still unresolved is who was the instigator of this foul deed?
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed and an exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline misty

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1249 on: May 19, 2014, 01:44:19 AM »
I have only limited information about the case against Leonor & Joao. Can anyone tell me, was the priest who was covering for Fr. Domingos Costa while he was away in Germany ever questioned? I read that Joana was last seen by the church. There was a suggestion she had been sold to a German couple, so I find the coincidence of Fr. Costa being away in Germany that very week quite intriguing.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2014, 02:41:56 PM by John »

Offline Carana

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1250 on: May 22, 2014, 02:30:44 PM »
Oh come on Carana, you can do better than that? They were both in it up to their necks, had they been innocent victims of an abduction they wouldn't have come out with the sob stories they did nor would they have resorted to recriminations and blaming each other.  As I stated before, the only part still unresolved is who was the instigator of this foul deed?


I disagree. I have no idea whether one or the other or both are actually guilty or not as there is no credible, concrete evidence to support it.

And note that this 25% only concerns exoneration due to DNA evidence... of which there was none (in any direction), and probably never will be.

False Confessions

In about 25% of DNA exoneration cases, innocent defendants made incriminating statements, delivered outright confessions or pled guilty.

These cases show that confessions are not always prompted by internal knowledge or actual guilt, but are sometimes motivated by external influences.


http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/False-Confessions.php

Offline Carana

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1251 on: May 22, 2014, 02:42:49 PM »
As a dad, how fair would you find it if your child had gone missing and an incompetent police force had decided that you and the mother (or relatives / friends) were necessarily guilty with no proof whatsoever?

Would your kids be ok with that?

Oh, and you were barely literate, didn't know what a police investigation is supposed to do, and had no resources to appoint a competent legal team.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2014, 02:44:20 PM by Carana »

Offline Carana

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1252 on: May 23, 2014, 02:06:04 PM »
Why do innocent people confess?
A variety of factors can contribute to a false confession during a police interrogation. Many cases have included a combination of several of these causes. They include:

•duress
•coercion
•intoxication
•diminished capacity
•mental impairment
•ignorance of the law
•fear of violence
•the actual infliction of harm
•the threat of a harsh sentence
•Misunderstanding the situation

•Some false confessions can be explained by the mental state of the confessor.

•Confessions obtained from juveniles are often unreliable – children can be easy to manipulate and are not always fully aware of their situation. Children and adults both are often convinced that that they can “go home” as soon as they admit guilt.

•People with mental disabilities have often falsely confessed because they are tempted to accommodate and agree with authority figures. Further, many law enforcement interrogators are not given any special training on questioning suspects with mental disabilities. An impaired mental state due to mental illness, drugs or alcohol may also elicit false admissions of guilt.

•Mentally capable adults also give false confessions due to a variety of factors like the length of interrogation, exhaustion or a belief that they can be released after confessing and prove their innocence later.

Regardless of the age, capacity or state of the confessor, what they often have in common is a decision – at some point during the interrogation process – that confessing will be more beneficial to them than continuing to maintain their innocence.

From threats to torture
Sometimes law enforcement use harsh interrogation tactics with uncooperative suspects. But some police officers, convinced of a suspect’s guilt, occasionally use tactics so persuasive that an innocent person feels compelled to confess. Some suspects have confessed to avoid physical harm or discomfort. Others are told they will be convicted with or without a confession, and that their sentence will be more lenient if they confess. Some are told a confession is the only way to avoid the death penalty.

Recording of interrogations
The Innocence Project has recommended specific changes in the practice of suspect interrogations in the U.S., including the mandatory electronic recording of interrogations, which has been shown to decrease the number of false confessions and increase the reliability of confessions as evidence. Read more about recommended policy reforms to prevent false confessions.

 http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/False-Confessions.php




Online John

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1253 on: May 25, 2014, 02:44:31 PM »

I disagree. I have no idea whether one or the other or both are actually guilty or not as there is no credible, concrete evidence to support it.

And note that this 25% only concerns exoneration due to DNA evidence... of which there was none (in any direction), and probably never will be.

False Confessions

In about 25% of DNA exoneration cases, innocent defendants made incriminating statements, delivered outright confessions or pled guilty.

These cases show that confessions are not always prompted by internal knowledge or actual guilt, but are sometimes motivated by external influences.


http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/False-Confessions.php

In the cold light of day and years after the event they both admit to their guilt yet you choose to disbelieve them.

People do silly things in the heat of the moment but when the dust settles the truth usually emerges.  Neither of them claim to be innocent so why do you?  Is it because Amaral got it right once so could very well be right a second time?

« Last Edit: May 25, 2014, 02:47:15 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed and an exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Carana

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1254 on: May 27, 2014, 01:05:59 PM »
In the cold light of day and years after the event they both admit to their guilt yet you choose to disbelieve them.

People do silly things in the heat of the moment but when the dust settles the truth usually emerges.  Neither of them claim to be innocent so why do you?  Is it because Amaral got it right once so could very well be right a second time?

I take each case on its own merits. I was one of the people who voted for this case to have a separate sub-forum for precisely that reason. I would have no problem whatsoever with stating that he might have been right in one case and not in another if I believed that to be so.

False confessions do happen for all sorts of reasons and it wasn't until I started attempting to read through the Supreme Court judgement that I realised that there was simply no concrete evidence of what may have happened to little Joana. 

Ironically, it seems that those who are convinced that he was right in the McCann case (even though I have yet to see anyone come up with a coherent explanation of how his theory could work in practice), insist that he was right in the Cipriano one for some reason, despite the total lack of evidence.

There is a missing child whose fate remains unknown and two people who may be in jail for a crime they hadn't committed. If they hadn't, then someone is still at large who may have struck again.



Offline Angelo222

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1255 on: May 27, 2014, 02:57:37 PM »
I take each case on its own merits. I was one of the people who voted for this case to have a separate sub-forum for precisely that reason. I would have no problem whatsoever with stating that he might have been right in one case and not in another if I believed that to be so.

False confessions do happen for all sorts of reasons and it wasn't until I started attempting to read through the Supreme Court judgement that I realised that there was simply no concrete evidence of what may have happened to little Joana. 

Ironically, it seems that those who are convinced that he was right in the McCann case (even though I have yet to see anyone come up with a coherent explanation of how his theory could work in practice), insist that he was right in the Cipriano one for some reason, despite the total lack of evidence.

There is a missing child whose fate remains unknown and two people who may be in jail for a crime they hadn't committed. If they hadn't, then someone is still at large who may have struck again.

The Cipriano's are not pleading innocence.  Their lawyers are not spearheading a miscarriage of justice campaign.  Ever asked yourself why?
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Carana

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1256 on: May 27, 2014, 04:41:47 PM »
The Cipriano's are not pleading innocence.  Their lawyers are not spearheading a miscarriage of justice campaign.  Ever asked yourself why?

Could the fact that they're banged up in prison from a penniless family have anything to do with it?

Online John

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1257 on: May 31, 2014, 01:23:44 AM »
Could the fact that they're banged up in prison from a penniless family have anything to do with it?

Since Leonor has made a deposition of her own volition stating that Joanna died as a result of a sloppy attempt to abduct her then I go with guilty.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed and an exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline sadie

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1258 on: June 01, 2014, 09:38:57 AM »
I have only limited information about the case against Leonor & Joao. Can anyone tell me, was the priest who was covering for Fr. Domingos Costa while he was away in Germany ever questioned? I read that Joana was last seen by the church. There was a suggestion she had been sold to a German couple, so I find the coincidence of Fr. Costa being away in Germany that very week quite intriguing.
What I would like to know is, who was the priest at that church and did that preist teach Joana at the little adjoining school ?  Particularly if Joana took the back way around the church, there were spots completely out of sight from any homes.    Also the little road at the back of the Church and school was ill lit and as it led no-where at that time, there was no traffic.... neither pedestrianised nor motorised.

A perfect spot for an abduction within town.

Offline Mr Moderator

Re: The Leonor Cipriano case reviewed... AGAIN!
« Reply #1259 on: June 23, 2014, 10:16:37 AM »
Funchal, Madeira.  Sunday 22nd June 2014.

Little Daniel was sold for €50k

Yet another faked abduction case in Portugal has been highlighted with the arrest of Daniel Vieira's mother.  She was arrested on the allegation that she tried to sell the child for 50,000 Euros.

Echoes of the Cipriano case no doubt.

www.miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3231.msg165523#msg165523


Little Daniel, who had been missing in Calheta, Madeira, would be sold for 50 thousand euro to a wealthy family. The police investigation is continuing but Lydia Freitas, the mother, now owned up by confessing the attempted sale, but does not reveal to whom.

Video





« Last Edit: June 23, 2014, 10:26:56 AM by Mr Moderator »