Why is there so much support for Leonor Cipriano from McCann supporters?

[Carana]

And all the while being paid by Metodo3.

As you say Carana most odd.

I have no idea whether Metodo3 did actually pay him, nor - if so - what exactly for.

M3 and Correia do appear to have had contact, which I find reasonable in view of his claim that he somehow "knew" or "felt" or whatever, where Madeleine's body may have been dumped.

M3 may also have asked him to help find out more from anyone who may have had suspicions or snippets about Joana's disappearance in the event of a potential connection between the two missing children.

[John]

This is off topic so will be removed later.  As I understand it davel has been moderated because he continued to post that there was no evidence of murder in the case. This is a gross misrepresentation of the prosecution case against Leonor and João Cipriano. 

We are not aware of everything which transpired between the suspects and the Portuguese police so there will be facts which we will never know.  There have also been confessions by both Leonor and João, some freely but others under coercion.

However, the evidence which has been documented includes the following:

1. A neighbour saw Joana heading home with her purchases.  The appeal court accepted that the child returned home.

2. Traces of human blood located at child head height were found on the corner of a wall in the house. Traces were also found on the living room walls and on the floor.  Several attempts had been made to remove this blood using chemicals which destroyed efforts to extract DNA from it.

3. Leandro Silva testified that his hacksaw which remained in the house had disappeared.

4. Joana's shoes were all accounted for in the house.

5. The following night both Leonor and João were seen leaving the house carrying a heavy bag.

6. Six days after Joana's disappearance Leonor purchased petrol and steel scrub-cloth in an attempt to remove the last vestiges of blood from the house.

7. Following directions from João Cipriano, PJ officers searched several locations for Joana's remains.


I accept that this evidence is circumstantial but it is evidence all the same.  Let's therefore have no more nonsense claiming that there is no evidence in the case. 

[Mr Gray]

This is off topic so will be removed later.  As I understand it davel has been moderated because he continued to post that there was no evidence of murder in the case. This is a gross misrepresentation of the prosecution case against Leonor and João Cipriano.  We are not aware of everything which transpired between the suspects and the Portuguese police so there will be facts which we will never know.  However,the evidence which has been documented includes the following:

1. A neighbour saw Joana heading home with her purchases.  The appeal court accepted that the child returned home.

2. Traces of human blood located at child head height were found on the corner of a wall in the house. Traces were also found on the living room walls and on the floor.  Several attempts had been made to remove this blood using chemicals which destroyed efforts to extract DNA from it.

3. Leandro Silva testified that his hacksaw which remained in the house had disappeared.

4. Joana's shoes were all accounted for in the house.

5. The following night both Leonor and João were seen leaving the house carrying a heavy bag.

6. Six days after Joana's disappearance Leonor purchased petrol and steel scrub-cloth in an attempt to remove the last vestiges of blood from the house.

7. Following directions from João Cipriano, PJ officers searched several locations for Joana's remains.

So where is the evidence of murder
No blood was found to match Joanna
There is no real evidence she is dead

[faithlilly]

I have no idea whether Metodo3 did actually pay him, nor - if so - what exactly for.

M3 and Correia do appear to have had contact, which I find reasonable in view of his claim that he somehow "knew" or "felt" or whatever, where Madeleine's body may have been dumped.

M3 may also have asked him to help find out more from anyone who may have had suspicions or snippets about Joana's disappearance in the event of a potential connection between the two missing children.

You are aware that Correia admitted he was receiving money from Metodo3 aren't you Carana ?

[stephen25000]

This is off topic so will be removed later.  As I understand it davel has been moderated because he continued to post that there was no evidence of murder in the case. This is a gross misrepresentation of the prosecution case against Leonor and João Cipriano. 

We are not aware of everything which transpired between the suspects and the Portuguese police so there will be facts which we will never know.  There have also been confessions by both Leonor and João, some freely but others under coercion.

However, the evidence which has been documented includes the following:

1. A neighbour saw Joana heading home with her purchases.  The appeal court accepted that the child returned home.

2. Traces of human blood located at child head height were found on the corner of a wall in the house. Traces were also found on the living room walls and on the floor.  Several attempts had been made to remove this blood using chemicals which destroyed efforts to extract DNA from it.

3. Leandro Silva testified that his hacksaw which remained in the house had disappeared.

4. Joana's shoes were all accounted for in the house.

5. The following night both Leonor and João were seen leaving the house carrying a heavy bag.

6. Six days after Joana's disappearance Leonor purchased petrol and steel scrub-cloth in an attempt to remove the last vestiges of blood from the house.

7. Following directions from João Cipriano, PJ officers searched several locations for Joana's remains.


I accept that this evidence is circumstantial but it is evidence all the same.  Let's therefore have no more nonsense claiming that there is no evidence in the case.

As a reminder for some readers, you do not need to find a body to obtain a conviction for murder.

[Brietta]

As a reminder for some readers, you do not need to find a body to obtain a conviction for murder.

Which usually sets the bar just a little bit higher for the quality of all the other evidence required to secure a conviction;  on a forum discussing among other things miscarriages of justice it cannot be considered extraordinary to study the quality of the evidence and the narrative which saw two people convicted of murder.

The title of the thread was not suggested by any one of the posters supportive of the McCann family ... it is therefore a bit of a travesty that some have been penalised by the obvious turn the discussion had to take.

I am sure that was an unforeseen and an unintended outcome.

[Jean-Pierre]

As a reminder for some readers, you do not need to find a body to obtain a conviction for murder.

As a reminder to other posters, proven torture of a suspect is a pretty bad idea.  And may lead open minded posters to suspicions of a miscarriage of justice.   

If the evidence against Cipriano was so strong, then why was torture necessary and why did the court rely so heavily on the "confession"?

 

[Carana]

OK lets consider there has indeed been a miscarriage of justice which is based on the conviction is not  safe not whether the appellants are guilty or not guilty.
Your move; where do you go from there with that information ?

Good question.

I'm still trying to work this out.

 The 2006 SC ruling was about which types of evidence were admissible or not.

The SC can normally only consider matters of law.

The bizarre "proven facts" based on "common experience" don't appear to have been questioned, perhaps because they couldn't be.

New evidence of a substantial nature would seem to be the only route... which clearly didn't work in Correia's attempt, because no "new evidence" could be substantiated, and additional character witness statements offered nothing new, either.

Seems like you're cooked unless your child suddenly appears alive, the remains found, or a confession can be substantiated.

[Alice Purjorick]

Perhaps I didn't make my point clearly enough.  Madeleine's disappearance so soon after and so close to the disappearance of Joana, both children seemingly vanished without trace, had the potential to cast doubt on the safety of the conviction of the Ciprianos, hence why in my opinion (all opinions are equally valid, remember?) Amaral and his team would have preferred not to dwell on the possibility that a child abductor was operating in the locale, preferring instead to stitch up the parents.

But:
"Grounds for a criminal appeal must be based in law and not facts. In other words, an appeal allows a defendant to attack the judgment of the trial court on legal, not factual grounds".



So where are the legal grounds in "two children disappeared" ?
Did Sr Amaral stitch up the parents?
Where is the evidence that both children were abducted?
One vanished without trace the other was murdered by her mother and uncle with no trace of the body being found, according to the court.

[Carana]

This is off topic so will be removed later.  As I understand it davel has been moderated because he continued to post that there was no evidence of murder in the case. This is a gross misrepresentation of the prosecution case against Leonor and João Cipriano. 

We are not aware of everything which transpired between the suspects and the Portuguese police so there will be facts which we will never know.  There have also been confessions by both Leonor and João, some freely but others under coercion.

However, the evidence which has been documented includes the following:

1. A neighbour saw Joana heading home with her purchases.  The appeal court accepted that the child returned home.

2. Traces of human blood located at child head height were found on the corner of a wall in the house. Traces were also found on the living room walls and on the floor.  Several attempts had been made to remove this blood using chemicals which destroyed efforts to extract DNA from it.

3. Leandro Silva testified that his hacksaw which remained in the house had disappeared.

4. Joana's shoes were all accounted for in the house.

5. The following night both Leonor and João were seen leaving the house carrying a heavy bag.

6. Six days after Joana's disappearance Leonor purchased petrol and steel scrub-cloth in an attempt to remove the last vestiges of blood from the house.

7. Following directions from João Cipriano, PJ officers searched several locations for Joana's remains.


I accept that this evidence is circumstantial but it is evidence all the same.  Let's therefore have no more nonsense claiming that there is no evidence in the case.

As you say that all of this will be removed, there's not much point in answering.

if I may go so far as your first point: a single witness stating the he/she saw the child walking towards home is not evidence that she actually did arrive home.

If that were to be the case, every abducted child walking home from school could be assumed to have also arrived home.

In a 20-hour murder trial, with 45 witnesses and a shock-horror video to watch and digest, there would seem to be little time to examine the so-called evidence in any detail.

[stephen25000]

As a reminder to other posters, proven torture of a suspect is a pretty bad idea.  And may lead open minded posters to suspicions of a miscarriage of justice.   

If the evidence against Cipriano was so strong, then why was torture necessary and why did the court rely so heavily on the "confession"?

So you think they are innocent of murder ?

[Alfred R Jones]

But:
"Grounds for a criminal appeal must be based in law and not facts. In other words, an appeal allows a defendant to attack the judgment of the trial court on legal, not factual grounds".



So where are the legal grounds in "two children disappeared" ?
Did Sr Amaral stitch up the parents?
Where is the evidence that both children were abducted?
One vanished without trace the other was murdered by her mother and uncle with no trace of the body being found, according to the court.

Do you understand the meaning of "in my opinion"?  Clearly not.  What does "Where are the legal grounds in two children disappeared" even mean FGS?!  Two children  have disappeared, are you disputing this?  Did Amaral stitch up the parents?  Yes, in my opinion he did.  Where is the evidence that both children were abducted?  Where is the evidence both children were done away with by their parents? In my opinion (remember all opinions are equally valid) there may be a link between the two cases, an opinion shared by MWT I believe.  You may not like my opinion but I think I'm still allowed to post it on here - or maybe not the way things have been going recently...

[Carana]

But:
"Grounds for a criminal appeal must be based in law and not facts. In other words, an appeal allows a defendant to attack the judgment of the trial court on legal, not factual grounds".



So where are the legal grounds in "two children disappeared" ?
Did Sr Amaral stitch up the parents?
Where is the evidence that both children were abducted?
One vanished without trace the other was murdered by her mother and uncle with no trace of the body being found, according to the court.

I have no idea.

If there is no mechanism to reconsider points of fact judged to be so due to "common experience", that I have already posted... there's a problem, IMO.

I can't find my recent post in which I'd pointed out just how many bizarre "facts" were considered to be true under that rule.


ETA: Found it.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6930.msg299975#msg299975

[slartibartfast]

As a reminder to other posters, proven torture of a suspect is a pretty bad idea.  And may lead open minded posters to suspicions of a miscarriage of justice.   

If the evidence against Cipriano was so strong, then why was torture necessary and why did the court rely so heavily on the "confession"?

There is difference between being beaten up in disgust and being beaten up to gain a confession. The court accepted that she had been beaten but not as far as I can work out why.

[carlymichelle]

There is difference between being beaten up in disgust and being beaten up to gain a confession. The court accepted that she had been beaten but not as far as I can work out why.

maybe they were   angry   at what they  put the  child  though?? police are human  too