Author Topic: Prosecution evidence?  (Read 44603 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Benice

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #195 on: February 17, 2014, 12:02:20 AM »
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.


So why did LC slap her daughter?   What reason did she give in her confession for doing that?

IIRC According to her 'husband' she never hit her children.

Are you saying that Joao couldn't even remember approximately where he hid the body?  Pull the other one Angelo?   How could you forget something like that?  This is a man who apparently had butchered a child's body.  Disposing of it would be a walk in the park after that.

It seems to me that her original lawyer was a complete waste of time in court.  And wasn't he a friend of Amaral's?    That was from memory so I'm happy to be corrected.








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 #196 on: February 17, 2014, 12:12:54 AM »

So why did LC slap her daughter?   What reason did she give in her confession for doing that?

IIRC According to her 'husband' she never hit her children.

Are you saying that Joao couldn't even remember approximately where he hid the body?  Pull the other one Angelo?   How could you forget something like that?  This is a man who apparently had butchered a child's body.  Disposing of it would be a walk in the park after that.

It seems to me that her original lawyer was a complete waste of time in court.  And wasn't he a friend of Amaral's?    That was from memory so I'm happy to be corrected.

Leonor supposedly slapped Joana because she caught her mother in an act of incest.  This was thrown out by The Court.  Hence The Motive was down the Swanee.

Yep. Leonor's Lawyer was and still is a friend of Amaral.  Caught taking drugs into the prison, but never charged.

What an unholy mess.

Offline Benice

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #197 on: February 17, 2014, 09:18:59 AM »
Leonor supposedly slapped Joana because she caught her mother in an act of incest.  This was thrown out by The Court.  Hence The Motive was down the Swanee.

Yep. Leonor's Lawyer was and still is a friend of Amaral.  Caught taking drugs into the prison, but never charged.

What an unholy mess.

So having apparently 'voluntarily' revealed a motive for murder that would appall and totally disgust everyone in Portugal - ensuring that her goose was well and truly cooked anyway - LC then decided for some inexplicable reason not to reveal the far lesser crime of where the body was - even when she was beaten half to death.   Why?  There simply is no logic to that.

IMO that 'motive', which the court threw out, came straight from the PJ and was designed to whip up so much hatred and animosity via the press in the general public's mind - right from the start  - that they  would be so incensed they would happily turn a blind eye to the fact that there was no actual evidence against her. 

That approach certainly seemed to work with the jury members  The court could find no motive and there was no forensic evidence.   But still she was found guilty?   How does that work?

IMO It's impossible to ignore the fact that the same approach was used in the McCann case by that 'person' who went on TV at the very beginning and announced as a confirmed fact - that the McCanns were 'swingers' - or as some members of the watching public would perceive them to be  - grossly sexually immoral foreigners.   And thus the same vile smear campaign against yet another grieving mother began 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 Angelo222

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #198 on: February 17, 2014, 09:58:12 AM »

So why did LC slap her daughter?   What reason did she give in her confession for doing that?

IIRC According to her 'husband' she never hit her children.

Are you saying that Joao couldn't even remember approximately where he hid the body?  Pull the other one Angelo?   How could you forget something like that?  This is a man who apparently had butchered a child's body.  Disposing of it would be a walk in the park after that.

It seems to me that her original lawyer was a complete waste of time in court.  And wasn't he a friend of Amaral's?    That was from memory so I'm happy to be corrected.

Those are questions for Leonor and Joao Cipriano.  Everyone bleats about them being beaten into a confession by the Portuguese police but the truth is somewhat different.  Leonor wasn't beaten when she made her signed deposition for the court in 2010 in which she spoke of wanting to come clean...better late than never I think her lawyer added for her.  She insists that it was her brother Joao who abducted the girl in another of his mad money making schemes but it went wrong, the deal fell through and the girl for whatever reason ended up dead.  You can believe her or disbelieve her but you can't have it both ways.

If she is telling the truth you have all been taken for mugs.  If she is still lying you are again being taken for mugs.  Can't you see you are in a no win situation?
« Last Edit: February 17, 2014, 12:59:42 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 Carana

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #199 on: February 17, 2014, 11:36:39 AM »
Those are questions for Leonor and Joao Cipriano.  Everyone bleats about them being beaten into a confession by the Portuguese police but the truth is somewhat different.  Leonor wasn't beaten when she made her signed deposition for the court in 2001 in which she spoke of wanting to come clean...better late than never I think her lawyer added for her.  She insists that it was her brother Joao who abducted the girl in another of his mad money making schemes but it went wrong, the deal fell through and the girl for whatever reason ended up dead.  You can believe her or disbelieve her but you can't have it both ways.

If she is telling the truth you have all been taken for mugs.  If she is still lying you are again being taken for mugs.  Can't you see you are in a no win situation?

You don't mean 2001, do you? She hadn't even disappeared then. If you mean the torture trial, she apparently hadn't excluded the possibility that João might have tried to sell her (way back, according to Leandro), but as one of several. Personally, I doubt it. She may well have been encouraged in that direction by others in a bid to simply get out of jail - there was nothing left to lose at that point. If that's the case, whoever encouraged her was misguided, to say the least, in my opinion. 

Offline Angelo222

Re: Prosecution evidence?
« Reply #200 on: February 17, 2014, 01:02:03 PM »
Sorry, that should have been 2010.  My tablet is playing up and appears to have its own view sometimes!   @)(++(*

I don't know about getting out of jail but it could have been an attempt to play the sympathy card.  A little trick which most of you have apparently fallen for.

She doesn't want to come out of jail a child killer for obvious reasons but playing the victim always goes down well.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2014, 01:08:28 PM by Angelo222 »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!