Author Topic: Prosecution evidence?  (Read 62161 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #180 on: February 16, 2014, 01:03:05 PM »
If she hadn't, I don't see how she could have been charged in the first place.

I would just like to see the context of the confession.  No chance of seeing the preceding interview, I don't suppose.

So why the need to beat her so badly after she had confessed?

The whole thing stinks.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2014, 03:34:21 PM by Eleanor »

Offline Carana

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #181 on: February 16, 2014, 03:25:49 PM »
I would just like to see the context of the confession.  No chance of seeing the proceeding interview, I don't suppose.

So why the need to beat her so badly after she had confessed
?

The whole thing stinks.

Did the PJ assume that simply presenting an accidental death statement would be sufficient to present to the magistrate and close the investigation? After a so-called admission to an accidental death, the next obvious question is what happened to the body...

Offline Benice

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #182 on: February 16, 2014, 08:41:20 PM »
There's this in which she apparently did.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2853.msg103417#msg103417

However, if she'd been made to sign on the dotted line at the PJ, appearing before a magistrate would be a formality. From what I can gather, if indeed she had actually done so, it would have been read out to her and she'd have to have formally acknowledged it (or denied it).

Acknowledging it doesn't mean anything in my view as there's no way of knowing what potential carrots and sticks she'd faced during interrogation in terms of intimidation, threats or a prospect of not being prosecuted for murder if she agreed to an accidental death.

I find it perfectly plausible that she could have falsely confessed to an accidental death with a lesser sentence so that Leandro could continue to look after the kids for a few years and try to find Joana. At the time, the PJ didn't even have to present her with the evidence against her... they could just bluff. The alternative was the prospect of a 25-year sentence.

I have no trouble at all in believing that is what happened Carana.  The PJ tried the same with  Kate McCann IMO.

The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Offline Eleanor

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #183 on: February 16, 2014, 08:51:15 PM »
I have no trouble at all in believing that is what happened Carana.  The PJ tried the same with  Kate McCann IMO.

Yep.  The PJ offered Kate a lesser sentence for a confession of Accidental Death, so why not Leonor Cipriano?

The similarities are getting almost boring.

And perleeze  someone don't tell me deals are not allowed.  We've already done that one to death.

Offline John

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #184 on: February 16, 2014, 09:21:36 PM »
I would just like to see the context of the confession.  No chance of seeing the preceding interview, I don't suppose.

So why the need to beat her so badly after she had confessed?

The whole thing stinks.

For the umpteenth time they were attempting to ascertain where the poor child lay.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #185 on: February 16, 2014, 09:36:49 PM »
For the umpteenth time they were attempting to ascertain where the poor child lay.

So they beat her half senseless for nearly two days, and still didn't find out.  Come on, John, even you can't believe that.

They had their confession, apparently.  And IF Joana had been fed to the pigs as The PJ seem to believe, what exactly did they expect to find?

Offline John

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #186 on: February 16, 2014, 09:42:39 PM »
So they beat her half senseless for nearly two days, and still didn't find out.  Come on, John, even you can't believe that.

They had their confession, apparently.  And IF Joana had been fed to the pigs as The PJ seem to believe, what exactly did they expect to find?

If you take the time to read the initial confession by João and Leonor before judge Ana Soares you will learn that João said he buried the girl.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #187 on: February 16, 2014, 09:50:55 PM »
If you take the time to read the initial confession by João and Leonor before judge Ana Soares you will learn that João said he buried the girl.

What does Leonor say?  And why was Jaoa unable to locate the body not very long after?  Who thought up The Pig Pen Theory?

Offline Angelo222

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #188 on: February 16, 2014, 09:56:58 PM »
What does Leonor say?  And why was Jaoa unable to locate the body not very long after?  Who thought up The Pig Pen Theory?

Its all there in the article Carana posted for you Eleanor.  Jeeeeez
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Eleanor

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #189 on: February 16, 2014, 10:04:20 PM »
Its all there in the article Carana posted for you Eleanor.  Jeeeeez

Ambiguous.  You may take it as Gospel According to Guilt, but I don't.

And if you are finding my questioning so tedious why don't you just close my account.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2014, 11:32:47 PM by Angelo222 »

Offline Benice

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #190 on: February 16, 2014, 10:24:17 PM »
For the umpteenth time they were attempting to ascertain where the poor child lay.

Don't you find it strange John that neither of them could say where the body was?  The only credible reason IMO is that they simply did not know - because she had been abducted.    Why go through terrible torture AFTER confessing - that makes no sense at all to me.   What did they have to gain that was worth being beaten half to death for once they had confessed she was dead ?    One would think that once confessions had been made - full co-operation with the PJ would have been far more to their advantage.

If  Joana was abducted - then all the torture in the world wouldn't change the fact that it would be impossible for them say where the body was  - simply because no body existed for them to dispose of.

I'm sure lots of 'suggestions' were put forward by the PJ as to where the body was - and were all agreed to at the time, just to stop the pain. 


 
The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Offline Benice

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #191 on: February 16, 2014, 10:30:43 PM »
What does Leonor say?  And why was Jaoa unable to locate the body not very long after? Who thought up The Pig Pen Theory?

The same people who thought up the Incest motive imo. .  The motive that was thrown out by the court.
The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Offline Eleanor

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #192 on: February 16, 2014, 10:33:09 PM »
Don't you find it strange John that neither of them could say where the body was?  The only credible reason IMO is that they simply did not know - because she had been abducted.    Why go through terrible torture AFTER confessing - that makes no sense at all to me.   What did they have to gain that was worth being beaten half to death for once they had confessed she was dead ?    One would think that once confessions had been made - full co-operation with the PJ would have been far more to their advantage.

If  Joana was abducted - then all the torture in the world wouldn't change the fact that it would be impossible for them say where the body was  - simply because no body existed for them to dispose of.

I'm sure lots of 'suggestions' were put forward by the PJ as to where the body was - and were all agreed to at the time, just to stop the pain.

This seems to be too difficult for John and Angelo to understand.

Offline Angelo222

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #193 on: February 16, 2014, 11:41:21 PM »
This seems to be too difficult for John and Angelo to understand.

You really don't get it do you.  Leonor initially freely confessed to having slapped Joana but she hit her head on the wall and died.  Enter a smart lawyer who convinced her to plead not guilty and say nothing.

Joao Cipriano admitted hiding the body but claimed he couldn't find the exact spot because it was dark.

And as we all know Leonor later attempted to blame Joao when she claimed he had taken the girl and tried to sell her to some Germans.  No wonder she was prosecuted for perjury, she has a new story every time she goes to court.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2014, 11:47:18 PM by Angelo222 »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Eleanor

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #194 on: February 16, 2014, 11:53:16 PM »
You really don't get it do you.  Leonor initially freely confessed to having slapped Joana but she hit her head on the wall and died.  Enter a smart lawyer who convinced her to plead not guilty and say nothing.

And you really don't get that a section of The PJ have a documented record for abuse and dirty tricks.

You simply don't know if she freely confessed without any coercion at all.  So stop treating me like a fool because I don't agree with you.
It comes to something when I can expect more verbal abuse from a moderator on a Miscarriage of Justice Forum than I get from common and garden posters.

PS.  Do you actually have any Miscarriages of Justice that you support?