The 'ARGUIDO' status revisited.

[Carana]

The law changed one week after the McCanns were made arguidos. I've already posted what I'd found on this.

[AnneGuedes]

Can you give us an etymological meaning for the word 'arguido', please, Anne?

Latin arguere,  in its transitive meaning (arguido is a past participle) : demonstrate, prove, affirm, impute

[Carana]

Latin arguere,  in its transitive meaning (arguido is a past participle) : demonstrate, prove, affirm, impute

Thanks, Anne, but what about in a legal sense?

What did the PJ have to "demonstrate, prove, affirm, impute" that Murat was involved, as opposed to a legal status to simply be able to question him in more detail in accordance with his right to legal representation?

[AnneGuedes]

Thanks, Anne, but what about in a legal sense?

What did the PJ have to "demonstrate, prove, affirm, impute" that Murat was involved, as opposed to a legal status to simply be able to question him in more detail in accordance with his right to legal representation?

I was asked the etymology, Carana ! The verb has two different meanings whether it is used transitively or intransitively.
The concept of "arguido" has to be considered in the whole Portuguese inquisitorial system of Justice, the civil code of which is largely inspired by the Napoleon one.
Wellington didn't even try to built lines against it.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Latin arguere,  in its transitive meaning (arguido is a past participle) : demonstrate, prove, affirm, impute

Thanks for that information, Anne (and Estuarine also, for the examples).

I know it's a bit theoretical but I just wanted to know the actual meaning of the word.

Would 'argue' be another translation, just out of interest?

These are not legal questions I know, but I am trying to get a grip on the word somehow. I find the arguido legal status a hard concept to understand.

Is it unique to Portuguese law or are there equivalents in other Latin systems?

[AnneGuedes]

Thanks for that information, Anne (and Estuarine also, for the examples).

I know it's a bit theoretical but I just wanted to know the actual meaning of the word.

Would 'argue' be another translation, just out of interest?

These are not legal questions I know, but I am trying to get a grip on the word somehow. I find the arguido legal status a hard concept to understand.

Is it unique to Portuguese law or are there equivalents in other Latin systems?

It is certainly someone against whom suspicions, arguments exist.
The McCanns were lucky to be "constituted arguidos" (that's the correct form, you're not an arguido) because of the rights that this statute provides. Had she not been made arguida, Mrs McCann would have been compelled to answer the 48 questions among which the first were crucial.
In France it is called "assisted witness", but I think it is much less used than in Portugal.

[Sherlock Holmes]

It is certainly someone against whom suspicions, arguments exist.
The McCanns were lucky to be "constituted arguidos" (that's the correct form, you're not an arguido) because of the rights that this statute provides. Had she not been made arguida, Mrs McCann would have been compelled to answer the 48 questions among which the first were crucial.
In France it is called "assisted witness", but I think it is much less used than in Portugal.

Interesting, Anne. Thank you.

And a reminder that Kate McCann's status as arguida left her at liberty to refuse to answer the famous 48 questions. It is almost contradictory that police would have conferred that fifth-amendment like status  on her at the same time as wanting her to answer the questions they devised, isn't it?

[Carana]

Found it.

Two main changes introduced in 2007 (a week after the arguido interviews): the addition of "suspeita fundada" (founded suspicion); and the right to be informed of the facts against them before making a statement.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2127.30

[Jean-Pierre]

Interesting, Anne. Thank you.

And a reminder that Kate McCann's status as arguida left her at liberty to refuse to answer the famous 48 questions. It is almost contradictory that police would have conferred that fifth-amendment like status  on her at the same time as wanting her to answer the questions they devised, isn't it?

I am no expert on Portuguese law, but talking to a couple of colleages it seems that Portuguese law diverges somewhat from other european codes. 

My understanding (and I am happy to be corrected of course) is that this stems from history.  Under the Salazar regime (The Estado Novo) it was effectively a police state. 

Someone called in as a witness in a criminal investigation was (and still are) legally bound to co-operate with the police, do not have the right to silence and face legal actions if they lie.  They were also not entitled to be legally represented. 

With the overturning of the regime, and with Portugal becoming a decomcratic state, the Salazar code was not rewritten, but was modified to provide for rights.  The right to remain silent, and to legal representation by either being declared, or declaring onself, an arguido.   This provided for rights similar to those under other regimes, but not exactly comparable. 

Once an arguido, one will remain one until the end of the investigation. 

And you are correct, Sherlock, the root is the latin arguere - which is also the root of Argue in English. 

     

[John]

Some members still have difficulty accepting that the McCanns were suspects in the disappearance of their own daughter.  The only reason they were constituted arguido was as a precursor to being charged in connection with that disappearance.  I have no doubt that had Dr Amaral (Chief Detective and Coordinator) not been removed from his post that this would have happened as he and his team were convinced of the McCanns involvement.

The McCanns must consider themselves very fortunate that this did not occur as a Portuguese jury could very well have convicted them. 

[VIXTE]

Some members still have difficulty accepting that the McCanns were suspects in the disappearance of their own daughter.  The only reason they were constituted arguido was as a precursor to being charged in connection with that disappearance.  I have no doubt that had Dr Amaral (Chief Detective and Coordinator) not been removed from his post that this would have happened as he and his team were convinced of the McCanns involvement.

The McCanns must consider themselves very fortunate that this did not occur as a Portuguese jury could very well have convicted them.

Well, didn't the prosecutor on the end rubbish the 'accusation'? If there was any evidence how could he do that?

And you mention Amaral, wasn't him an arguido too? So, by this theory, Amaral was a suspect too?

[Carana]

Some members still have difficulty accepting that the McCanns were suspects in the disappearance of their own daughter.  The only reason they were constituted arguido was as a precursor to being charged in connection with that disappearance.  I have no doubt that had Dr Amaral (Chief Detective and Coordinator) not been removed from his post that this would have happened as he and his team were convinced of the McCanns involvement.

The McCanns must consider themselves very fortunate that this did not occur as a Portuguese jury could very well have convicted them.

How does that work? Murat was made an arguido in May... and Amaral had until October, when he was taken off the case, to present the case to the prosecutor if there had been anything of substance. Being made an arguido does seem to be a precursor to being arrested / charged, but it doesn't mean that every arguido will be. Until the law had changed, the two issues that I mentioned above (founded suspicion and the right to be informed) weren't spelled out, there was therefore latitude for PJ bluffing. The changes seem to be a step in the right direction as far as I can tell. Prior to the changes, suspicions didn't need to be founded and new arguidos didn't have the right to be informed of what the police supposedly had against them.

It will get better if funds are found to provide recorded audiovisual coverage of witness/ suspect interviews and verbatim statements.

[Jean-Pierre]

Some members still have difficulty accepting that the McCanns were suspects in the disappearance of their own daughter.  The only reason they were constituted arguido was as a precursor to being charged in connection with that disappearance.  I have no doubt that had Dr Amaral (Chief Detective and Coordinator) not been removed from his post that this would have happened as he and his team were convinced of the McCanns involvement.

The McCanns must consider themselves very fortunate that this did not occur as a Portuguese jury could very well have convicted them.

Well said Carana.

I disagree John.  The reason they were constituted as arguidos was that, without that step, the PJ would not have been able to pose the questions in the way they did. 

In order to bring a charge, Amaral would have needed evidence of wrongdoing.  And to date no such evidence has been brought into the investigation.  One of the particular features of the Portuguese penal code is that the whole case must be laid open to public scrutiny, in a way that other regimes do not.  Doubtless a reaction to the stasi like secrecy of the Salaza regime, but it give the lie to those who claim that the PJ are "holding something back". 

Under the Portuguese penal code, it would be the PP who would decide on charges, not the PJ.  And (unless you subscribe to the theory of political interference) he would not have been able to.

Vixtie - he was, but in a different case. 

 

[AnneGuedes]

Some members still have difficulty accepting that the McCanns were suspects in the disappearance of their own daughter.  The only reason they were constituted arguido was as a precursor to being charged in connection with that disappearance.  I have no doubt that had Dr Amaral (Chief Detective and Coordinator) not been removed from his post that this would have happened as he and his team were convinced of the McCanns involvement.

The McCanns must consider themselves very fortunate that this did not occur as a Portuguese jury could very well have convicted them.

The MP, not the PJ, decides whether the charges are sufficient to bring someone to Court.
The McCanns were fortunate that there's no record of the August interviews (they were "informal"). What was said and not said then is likely what led Gonçalo Amaral to require from the MP the statute of arguido for the McCanns. This statute was granted as a  (human right) prevention against any self incrimination in the course of a tense interrogatory (it also protected the PJ of eventual accusations of abuse). Nobody protested when Mr Murat was constituted an arguido, his potential guilt seeming within the expected "normalities". But in the McCanns case it was entirely different. These parents had always been the victims (a statement of the PJ, joined to their first statements, says they are victims, not witnesses).
The statute of arguido is a shield against the always possible failures of any system of justice, but from the need of a shield one infers that justice has arguments against someone. This is why the McCanns reacted so violently when they were informed that a lawyer was required for the next interviews. From the presence of a lawyer, the media would immediately deduce that the McCanns were possibly not as white as they pretended, a new and scandalous idea. And that's what effectively happened.
All the questioning about what meant exactly the (banal) word "arguido" is related to the reversal of the situation and its possible implications.

[Mr Gray]

Some members still have difficulty accepting that the McCanns were suspects in the disappearance of their own daughter.  The only reason they were constituted arguido was as a precursor to being charged in connection with that disappearance.  I have no doubt that had Dr Amaral (Chief Detective and Coordinator) not been removed from his post that this would have happened as he and his team were convinced of the McCanns involvement.

The McCanns must consider themselves very fortunate that this did not occur as a Portuguese jury could very well have convicted them.

 the archiving report showed there was no evidence to charge so what you are saying makes no sense....all parents of a missing child are suspects...its nothing unusual and I don't think anyone has a problem with that. where we differ is I don't consider them suspects now...and neither does SY