Author Topic: Prosecution evidence?  (Read 62174 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #45 on: November 17, 2013, 04:17:30 PM »
from what I can see you are getting all this from newspapers..the same papers who said things like Gerry wasn't maddies real father

Dont get carried away now...reporting on court proceedings is not the same as writing speculative articles...big difference!

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #46 on: November 17, 2013, 04:23:37 PM »
Dont get carried away now...reporting on court proceedings is not the same as writing speculative articles...big difference!

we don't know how much was actual reporting and how much was speculation...We would have to see the actual articles to be sure ...shouldn't be a problem.. what we do know is that john has already made statement that they testified in court which we know is untrue. Unlike you I am not prepared to condemn people without proper evidence...

Offline Carana

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #47 on: November 17, 2013, 04:29:04 PM »
Some of these "facts" are actually in the Supreme Court document. Some seem to be proven, others seem to be just accepted under the "rules of common experience".

The police officers went to check out this house on 22 September, which is when they found these blood spots, but it hadn't been sealed off.

There were some traces of human and animal blood, but were they all blood spots? What did they use in situ? A U/V torch? If so, it's not only blood that would show up. It would then be up to be lab to determine what they could.

Body fluids such as saliva, semen, vaginal fluids, urine, and perspiration give off fluorescent light when illuminated by a source of ultraviolet light, which is a very efficient method for detecting such stains in a crime scene or in objects collected from the scene, such as clothing, towels, bed sheets, or decorative items. Even dried stains become fluorescent under UV light.

http://www.enotes.com/topics/ultraviolet-light-analysis

They may have used other tests in situ, but it's not clear.

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #48 on: November 17, 2013, 04:36:55 PM »
we don't know how much was actual reporting and how much was speculation...We would have to see the actual articles to be sure ...shouldn't be a problem.. what we do know is that john has already made statement that they testified in court which we know is untrue. Unlike you I am not prepared to condemn people without proper evidence...

Dont get carried away now...reporting on court proceedings is not the same as writing speculative articles...big difference!

And did anyone say Leandro testified IN COURT? As opposed to testified TO the authorities ergo to the court?

Do YOU actually know what is true or not? Without having all the facts at your fingertips? Which for you are FACTS, you and some of your your ilk assert that nothing the arguidos said can be taken as evidence as they were tortured or under a threat of torture, therefore you have NO facts from their  mouths in that argument...where is their defence?...if you want to argue that two  innocent people were put away for murder with ZERO evidence, do carry on......
« Last Edit: November 17, 2013, 04:39:39 PM by Redblossom »

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #49 on: November 17, 2013, 04:42:49 PM »
Dont get carried away now...reporting on court proceedings is not the same as writing speculative articles...big difference!

And did anyone say Leandro testified IN COURT? As opposed to testified TO the authorities ergo to the court?

Do YOU actually know what is true or not? Without having all the facts at your fingertips? Which for you are FACTS, you and some of your your ilk assert that nothing the arguidos said can be taken as evidence as they were tortured or under a threat of torture, therefore you have NO facts from their  mouths in that argument...where is their defence?...if you want to argue that two  innocent people were put away for murder with ZERO evidence, do carry on......

 you certainly cannot accept as reliable a statement which has been extracted due to torture..we know Leonor was tortured by the PJ...Joao and Leandro both claim to have been assaulted... unsafe conviction from what I can see

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #50 on: November 17, 2013, 04:51:38 PM »
you certainly cannot accept as reliable a statement which has been extracted due to torture..we know Leonor was tortured by the PJ...Joao and Leandro both claim to have been assaulted... unsafe conviction from what I can see

Was she being tortured in 2009 when she made her statement blaming her brother for tryng to sell  her?/killing her?

Eta

As to what she said when and where before during or after a pj or inmate beating  its very murky to get to the facts as its one persons word aganst anothers......there are too many versions
« Last Edit: November 17, 2013, 04:54:22 PM by Redblossom »

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #51 on: November 17, 2013, 04:54:40 PM »
Was she being tortured in 2009 when she made her statement blaming her brother for tryng to sell  her?/killing her?

 What a stupid thing to say..do you have a cite to this statement

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #52 on: November 17, 2013, 04:56:57 PM »
What a stupid thing to say..do you have a cite to this statement

whch bit was stupid?

Eta Ive given you a link before, did you file it under not relevant???


I cant reproduce the link at moment as Jm site is playing up, cheers
« Last Edit: November 17, 2013, 05:10:13 PM by Redblossom »

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #53 on: November 17, 2013, 04:58:08 PM »
http://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/25449/1/Santos%20Filipe%20-%20The%20Dissemination%20and%20Popularisation%20of%20Surveillance.pdf

 this article is worth a read...5 cases looked at including McCannn and Cipriano. Out of five cases the pj managed to get confessions in three..How are they managing a 60% confession rate..Torture?

Offline Carana

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #54 on: November 17, 2013, 05:06:26 PM »
http://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/25449/1/Santos%20Filipe%20-%20The%20Dissemination%20and%20Popularisation%20of%20Surveillance.pdf

 this article is worth a read...5 cases looked at including McCannn and Cipriano. Out of five cases the pj managed to get confessions in three..How are they managing a 60% confession rate..Torture?

Thanks for that. I've bookmarked it, but I haven't read it yet. You might be interested in another study

A imprensa popular e a genética forense - CSI Portugal?
Helena Machado
Universidade do Minho
Filipe Santos
Universidade de Coimbra

I can't give a link as it's an automatic pdf download.

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #55 on: November 17, 2013, 05:11:34 PM »
http://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/25449/1/Santos%20Filipe%20-%20The%20Dissemination%20and%20Popularisation%20of%20Surveillance.pdf

 this article is worth a read...5 cases looked at including McCannn and Cipriano. Out of five cases the pj managed to get confessions in three..How are they managing a 60% confession rate..Torture?

Yes, sure, the PJ torture 60 per cent of murder suspects.......leading to confessions and convictions......have you not been reading the news? Lately?

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #56 on: November 17, 2013, 05:17:51 PM »
What a stupid thing to say..do you have a cite to this statement

http://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2009/01/translation-of-leonor-ciprianos.html

In her own writing as well, was she being tortured in 2009 when she wrote this?????

Offline Angelo222

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #57 on: November 17, 2013, 06:23:58 PM »
Why do you consistently bring the McCanns and Madeleine into this board Dave?  I am not in the least interested in discussing McCann here as they are irrelevant to this case.

As far as John's reference to Leonor giving evidence is concerned he clarified this.  She and Joao both stood silent at their own trial having been told by their respective lawyers that it was to their advantage to do so.  Leonor gave evidence at the trial of the PJ officers and that is where the perjury conviction comes from.  Hope this helps??
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Anna

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #58 on: November 17, 2013, 06:25:29 PM »
you certainly cannot accept as reliable a statement which has been extracted due to torture..we know Leonor was tortured by the PJ...Joao and Leandro both claim to have been assaulted... unsafe conviction from what I can see

Have a look at the Jury argument
http://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814/bfaf1cea93ab75fb8025716200388d89?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,cipriano

http://www.freetranslation.com/
“You should not honour men more than truth.”
― Plato

Offline Angelo222

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #59 on: November 17, 2013, 07:29:27 PM »
The more I look at the facts in this case the more convinced I am that Leonor was involved.  Joao even stated in his statement that he wanted to call for medical assistance for the child but Leonor wouldn't do it.  Ask yourself who on earth would make up such a thing unless they were trying to protect their own position.

And who on earth would drag the police around scrap yards, dumps, rivers, drainage canals and heavens know where else for over a dozen days in a row on some sort of wild goose chase if they were innocent??
« Last Edit: November 17, 2013, 07:35:19 PM by Angelo222 »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!