Former PJ inspector Paulo Pereira Cristovao arrested for armed robbery.

[Alice Purjorick]

The legality of those earnings is very much a matter to be questioned. IMO.

Until it is proven that money made "on the back of Madeleine's disappearance" has been made illegally he is entitled to a presumption of innocence and you have no legitimate gripe.
Unless of course you believe that "in your opinion he is bent and should therefore be castigated on the basis of your opinion" should hold sway

[Brietta]

Until it is proven that money made "on the back of Madeleine's disappearance" has been made illegally he is entitled to a presumption of innocence and you have no legitimate gripe.
Unless of course you believe that "in your opinion he is bent and should therefore be castigated on the basis of your opinion" should hold sway

My opinion is that for the moment the Portuguese courts are bending over backwards ensuring his right to the presumption of innocence is fully protected.

Mind you, I'm not too sure how that ties in with his arguido status in consideration of the precedent set by the McCann appeal court judges is concerned.

[misty]

I know this report doesn't really belong on this thread but it's very relevant regarding the Portuguese courts' attitude to policeman.

http://portugalresident.com/court-vetoes-bid-to-suspend-18-police-accused-of-racist-aggression
Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on September 28, 2017
The dismal issue of police violence in a socially-deprived neighbourhood of Lisbon has moved to a new level today as Sintra magistrates are reported to have refused the public ministry attempt to suspend 18 agents.

The bid, lodged earlier this month, was made in the interests of “public safety and tranquility”.

Explained reports, prosecutors felt both were at risk if the agents were allowed to stay at their posts.

However Sintra court blocked the moves, retaining the original bail terms, which involve the accused residing at their home addresses (the lightest of all bail stipulations).

As national media has reiterated, the situation centres on various alleged crimes of aggression against six black youths at Alfragide police station in Cova da Moura in 2015.

The incident was the subject of a BBC documentary months before the ‘wheels of Portuguese justice’ even began turning (click here).

Even now, the 18 ‘arguidos’ have yet to be given a trial date.

To recap, they have been accused of “torture, kidnap, injury and qualified offences to physical integrity” as well as “cruel and degrading treatment” of the six youths, and falsification of documents (referring to official reports on the incident).

Today’s news means at least that the policemen and women can all go on working and receiving their salaries.

[Miss Taken Identity]

My opinion is that for the moment the Portuguese courts are bending over backwards ensuring his right to the presumption of innocence is fully protected.

Mind you, I'm not too sure how that ties in with his arguido status in consideration of the precedent set by the McCann appeal court judges is concerned.

Your opinion regarding the momentary place in time with regards the Portuguese justice system is firmly based on the McCanns and their situation, that seems a bit weird to me to trash a whole country just because two parents didn't bother dining with their children- but then nothing surprises me with supporters trashing everything and many others in the name of 'my opinion' to deflect any blame from the McCanns.

But anyway , The McCanns were pursuing a civil case,  The  other Mr C is a criminal case  quite different.  The usual presumed innocent is still in place while under investigation.

[Alice Purjorick]

My opinion is that for the moment the Portuguese courts are bending over backwards ensuring his right to the presumption of innocence is fully protected.

Mind you, I'm not too sure how that ties in with his arguido status in consideration of the precedent set by the McCann appeal court judges is concerned.

Are you sure that precedent works in Portuguese law in that way?
Apart from the obvious comment of "Which precedent is that then" ?

[Miss Taken Identity]

Are you sure that precedent works in Portuguese law in that way?
Apart from the obvious comment of "Which precedent is that then" ?

Alice, now would that not be the precedence of  Cristovao is arrested- presumed innocent - UNTIL proved guilty
Much the same as the McCanns who were presumed innocent UNTIL proved guilty
 
Not the same as the McCanns are innocent which is a whole different ball game altogether. 

[Robittybob1]

Alice, now would that not be the precedence of  Cristovao is arrested- presumed innocent - UNTIL proved guilty
Much the same as the McCanns who were presumed innocent UNTIL proved guilty
 
Not the same as the McCanns are innocent which is a whole different ball game altogether. 

I thought it was ruled the McCanns were innocent until proven guilty. 

[stephen25000]

I thought it was ruled the McCanns were innocent until proven guilty.

The Mccanns haven't been charged Rob.

[misty]

The Mccanns haven't been charged Rob.

So the presumption of innocence only applies to people who are charged with a crime. What is the legal status of people who are not charged with a crime, especially a crime which cannot even be defined?

[Carana]

So the presumption of innocence only applies to people who are charged with a crime. What is the legal status of people who are not charged with a crime, especially a crime which cannot even be defined?

Trial by social media?

[Robittybob1]

The Mccanns haven't been charged Rob.

You wouldn't think so by what is said in some FB groups.  They have been charged , found guilty, and punished.

[Miss Taken Identity]

So the presumption of innocence only applies to people who are charged with a crime. What is the legal status of people who are not charged with a crime, especially a crime which cannot even be defined?

You asked-So the presumption of innocence only applies to people who are charged with a crime.

The answer is Yes! exactly.

Let me explain.  You saw me standing at a bus stop and the glass was smashed- you call the police and they arrest me because you have accused me, you believe I am responsible for this crime. ( note the word believe because you didn't actually see me do it) Only I know if I did it or not.
On your say so I am arrested on suspicion of committing a crime ( this mean I am a suspect)- this is the important part- The police can only suspect me and then go find evidence and eye witnesses of me committing this crime- during this time I am to be presumed innocent -in other words they can't go to the press and say I did it. If no evidence is found  I cannot be charged with a crime but I can still be suspected of doing it for the rest of my life. It would be a theory as to why and how I did it ,but that would just be a theory.

I do hope this clears up this whole the McCanns were not presumed innocent diatribe. It is so boring and it comes across as being genuine when it is not.

So to summarise: the McCanns were suspects in their daughters disappearance, the PJ had a theory. Full stop.

[slartibartfast]

You asked-So the presumption of innocence only applies to people who are charged with a crime.

The answer is Yes! exactly.

Let me explain.  You saw me standing at a bus stop and the glass was smashed- you call the police and they arrest me because you have accused me, you believe I am responsible for this crime. ( note the word believe because you didn't actually see me do it) Only I know if I did it or not.
On your say so I am arrested on suspicion of committing a crime ( this mean I am a suspect)- this is the important part- The police can only suspect me and then go find evidence and eye witnesses of me committing this crime- during this time I am to be presumed innocent -in other words they can't go to the press and say I did it. If no evidence is found  I cannot be charged with a crime but I can still be suspected of doing it for the rest of my life. It would be a theory as to why and how I did it ,but that would just be a theory.

I do hope this clears up this whole the McCanns were not presumed innocent diatribe. It is so boring and it comes across as being genuine when it is not.

So to summarise: the McCanns were suspects in their daughters disappearance, the PJ had a theory. Full stop.

Succinctly put.

[Carana]

You asked-So the presumption of innocence only applies to people who are charged with a crime.

The answer is Yes! exactly.

Let me explain.  You saw me standing at a bus stop and the glass was smashed- you call the police and they arrest me because you have accused me, you believe I am responsible for this crime. ( note the word believe because you didn't actually see me do it) Only I know if I did it or not.
On your say so I am arrested on suspicion of committing a crime ( this mean I am a suspect)- this is the important part- The police can only suspect me and then go find evidence and eye witnesses of me committing this crime- during this time I am to be presumed innocent -in other words they can't go to the press and say I did it. If no evidence is found  I cannot be charged with a crime but I can still be suspected of doing it for the rest of my life. It would be a theory as to why and how I did it ,but that would just be a theory.

I do hope this clears up this whole the McCanns were not presumed innocent diatribe. It is so boring and it comes across as being genuine when it is not.

So to summarise: the McCanns were suspects in their daughters disappearance, the PJ had a theory. Full stop.

Were suspects in a general sense. There's an issue with the translation of arguido which varies according to context.

[misty]

You asked-So the presumption of innocence only applies to people who are charged with a crime.

The answer is Yes! exactly.

Let me explain.  You saw me standing at a bus stop and the glass was smashed- you call the police and they arrest me because you have accused me, you believe I am responsible for this crime. ( note the word believe because you didn't actually see me do it) Only I know if I did it or not.
On your say so I am arrested on suspicion of committing a crime ( this mean I am a suspect)- this is the important part- The police can only suspect me and then go find evidence and eye witnesses of me committing this crime- during this time I am to be presumed innocent -in other words they can't go to the press and say I did it. If no evidence is found  I cannot be charged with a crime but I can still be suspected of doing it for the rest of my life. It would be a theory as to why and how I did it ,but that would just be a theory.

I do hope this clears up this whole the McCanns were not presumed innocent diatribe. It is so boring and it comes across as being genuine when it is not.

So to summarise: the McCanns were suspects in their daughters disappearance, the PJ had a theory. Full stop.

You cannot be declared a suspect in a theoretical crime. The disappearance of a child is not a crime in itself.