That is exactly what happens when a suspect pleads guilty.
To answer that question one has to understand the timeline in the Cipriano case.
1. Both Leonor and João admitted involvement when represented by their first lawyer. She effectively to accidental killing of her daughter and he to assisting in the removal and concealment of a cadaver. On this basis they both appeared before an examining magistrate, she was remanded in custody, he was released on bail in order to assist police find Joana's body.
2. João failed to find the body despite taking police on several goose chases. Anyone would think he was playing for time but that is another story.
3. Given the admissions by both Leonor and João, police were not looking for anyone else, a full investigation was deemed unnecessary.
4. Enter our lawyer friend Marcos Aragão Correia into the equation. He turns up at court for the trial claiming to represent Leonor Cipriano even though she already had a lawyer. She pleads not guilty to murder and refuses to testify. João has also changed his plea and refuses to testify.
5. The police are left with no option but to go ahead and carry out a full murder investigation, the result of which we all now know.
Good grief!
Torture has been proven in a Portuguese court of law.
The question of whether the torture came after or before the "confession" is irrelevant.
The fact of (proven) torture (by police) indicates, clearly, that the whole interview process was conducted under circumstances of duress, which ought to have been grounds, in its own right, for outright acquittal.
Instead, Leonor had her sentence increased because she is deemed not to have got her facts entirely straight while tied, terrified, to a chair, and beaten to a point of near blindness.
To say that this was not the finest hour of Portuguese "justice" would be an understatement ....