Author Topic: When was Murat ruled out?  (Read 47903 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #270 on: September 11, 2020, 08:18:02 PM »
You are not correct in my opinion. The Article is quite clear. The defendant can, within 20 days OF THE RULING TO DISCONTINUE THE PROCEEDINGS apply for the opening of the preliminary jusicial stage. This is my final word on the subject.

Article 287

Application for the opening of the preliminary judicial stage

1 - The opening of the preliminary judicial stage may be requested within a 20-day period counted from
the date of service of the bill of indictment or of the ruling to discontinue the proceedings:
a) By the defendant
https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/6422/file/Portugal_CPC_am2015_excerpts_en.pdf

I'm a 100 % correct... In your post it ends with the
a, the defendant... Could you post what comes after the word defendant.. And I think you will realise you are wrong. I'll look at mistys post which includes  the words following the defendant explaining on what grounds the defendant can ask for a continuation

Offline Robittybob1

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #271 on: September 11, 2020, 08:24:04 PM »
I'm a 100 % correct... In your post it ends with the
a, the defendant... Could you post what comes after the word defendant.. And I think you will realise you are wrong. I'll look at mistys post which includes  the words following the defendant explaining on what grounds the defendant can ask for a continuation
From my understanding it was on the basis of new evidence being submitted.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #272 on: September 11, 2020, 08:26:58 PM »
Here's the English wording of the relevant Portuguese Law. The McCanns would not have wanted the case to be officially closed & there was only one other option for them imo, i.e. what Davel has already posted.

the defendant...in respect of the facts that are prosescuted by the prosecuter..

so the defendant can make the request to challenge th efacts that they are being prosecuted for...thats it. Not to simply keep the case going...its  avery specific provision.

once the case is shelved the McCanns are no longer arguidos, are not being charged with anything and then have nothing they can callenge


Unfortunately mistys file doesnt appear in the quote so I will provide a link to the original post.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11725.msg617575#msg617575


I havent looked at the link gunit has posted but im pretty sure it will say exactly as ive predicted...it will say defendants...but it has  a caveat
« Last Edit: September 11, 2020, 08:31:32 PM by Davel »

Offline Mr Gray

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #273 on: September 11, 2020, 08:28:07 PM »
From my understanding it was on the basis of new evidence being submitted.


Its seperate from this. THe mcccans had no right simply to request the reopening...they did if new evidence was founnd.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #274 on: September 11, 2020, 08:31:03 PM »
the defendant...in respect of the facts that are prosescuted by the prosecuter..

so the defendant can make the request to challenge th efacts that they are being prosecuted for...thats it. Not to simply keep the case going...its  avery specific provision.

once the case is shelved the McCanns are no longer arguidos, are not being charged with anything and then have nothing they can callenge
But then they remain forever in the former arguido status, of never been cleared, and hence remain convicted in the court of public opinion for life.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #275 on: September 11, 2020, 08:33:04 PM »
But then they remain forever in the former arguido status, of never been cleared, and hence remain convicted in the court of public opinion for life.

they are no longer arguidos and are not convicted in the court of public opinion...by some yes...but we don't know and I doubt if its  a majority

Offline Robittybob1

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #276 on: September 11, 2020, 08:41:04 PM »
they are no longer arguidos and are not convicted in the court of public opinion...by some yes...but we don't know and I doubt if its  a majority
I think you'll find it is.  The mere fact they left the kids alone convicts them in the COPO [court of public opinion].

What is worse a criminal charge or a conviction in the court of public opinion?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #277 on: September 11, 2020, 08:43:35 PM »
You are not correct in my opinion. The Article is quite clear. The defendant can, within 20 days OF THE RULING TO DISCONTINUE THE PROCEEDINGS apply for the opening of the preliminary jusicial stage. This is my final word on the subject.

Article 287

Application for the opening of the preliminary judicial stage

1 - The opening of the preliminary judicial stage may be requested within a 20-day period counted from
the date of service of the bill of indictment or of the ruling to discontinue the proceedings:
a) By the defendant
https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/6422/file/Portugal_CPC_am2015_excerpts_en.pdf

as I correctly predicted there is  a caveat after the word "defendant" which you chose not to quote. A more complete quote from your link is...

a) By the defendant, as regards facts based upon which the Public Prosecutor submitted a bill of
indictment or the party assisting the Public Prosecutor produced its accusation, where the proceedings
depend


So the defendant can ask for continuation based on the facts of the charges against them. this is exactly as i have said all along. The McCanns having had no charges made against them had no right to request the continuation. its about time you accepted that your claim which you and others have beleived for 13 years is wrong.








Offline Mr Gray

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #278 on: September 11, 2020, 08:45:42 PM »
I think you'll find it is.  The mere fact they left the kids alone convicts them in the COPO [court of public opinion].

What is worse a criminal charge or a conviction in the court of public opinion?

I see a lot of sympathty for them....and dont accept your view on the decision of the court of public opinion.

Offline G-Unit

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #279 on: September 11, 2020, 11:07:41 PM »
Article 286

Purpose and scope of the preliminary judicial stage

1 - The purpose of the preliminary judicial stage is to have the Examining Judge confirm the decision to
prosecute or to discontinue the proceedings with a view to establishing whether the case is to be tried in
a higher court.
https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/6422/file/Portugal_CPC_am2015_excerpts_en.pdf

Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Robittybob1

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #280 on: September 11, 2020, 11:55:44 PM »
Article 286

Purpose and scope of the preliminary judicial stage

1 - The purpose of the preliminary judicial stage is to have the Examining Judge confirm the decision to
prosecute or to discontinue the proceedings with a view to establishing whether the case is to be tried in
a higher court.
https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/6422/file/Portugal_CPC_am2015_excerpts_en.pdf
What "higher court"?   Is that the court one above the Court of Public Opinion (COPO)?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline misty

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #281 on: September 12, 2020, 01:18:08 AM »
http://gddc.ministeriopublico.pt/pagina/notes-portuguese-legal-terms

Início » Atividade » Legislação traduzida » Notes on Portuguese Legal Terms
NOTES ON PORTUGUESE LEGAL TERMS
 

 ARGUIDO
(The status of “arguido”/ defendant)

The status of arguido (defendant) is granted when an inquiry has been opened or an investigation is led regarding a specific person, if there are grounds to suspect that such person has committed a criminal offence and when that person is heard by a judicial authority – Public Prosecutor or Examining Judge – or a criminal police body, or where a coercive or patrimonial guarantee measure must be imposed or the suspect is detained. When acquiring the status of arguido, the person benefits from a set of procedural rights and duties covered by law.

Under this status, the person is no longer a simple participant in proceedings, differently from the suspect who does not have a specific status, but is indeed a subject in court, and has the right to: be assisted by a defence counsel; attend all procedural acts that directly affect him; be heard in court or before the examining judge whenever they render a decision that may personally affect him; be informed on charges against him prior to making statements before any authority; take part in the inquiry (and in the examination – instrução - before the Examining Court) by providing evidence and requesting any measures found necessary; request the opening of the examination stage (instrução) where the Public Prosecutor has formally charged him, in order to challenge this decision and to prevent it from being submitted to a criminal court.

[Portuguese Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP), Articles 57-67]


 CÚMULO JURÍDICO
(Sentence computation)

Where a sentence is merged, i.e. computed together, with the sentences of other court cases, the maximum sentence that may be imposed as an aggregate penalty will have an upper limit comprehending the addition of all partly sentences imposed in all sets of proceedings. However, the upper limit of the merged sentence (aggregate sentence) may not exceed 25 years, which corresponds to the highest custodial sentence concretely applicable in Portugal, or 900 days in the case of a merged fine. The lower limit corresponds to the highest of the sentences concretely applied to the several criminal offences.

The computation of sentences (cúmulo) is the result of a specific trial where the court examines the relevant previous sentences to be merged, and considers the facts perpetrated by the defendant and his personality altogether in order to render a new sentence punishing the criminal activity of the defendant under trial as a whole. The defendant must be present during the trial hearing and can present his own arguments.

The cúmulo is done by the court where the defendant had his latest conviction, provided that the facts underlying those proceedings have been perpetrated prior to the date of the sentences to be merged.

The sentences to be computed or merged must be final and res judicatae. Time already served in prison in the scope of the merged sentences is deducted from the aggregate penalty to be imposed as cúmulo.

[Portuguese Criminal Code (CCP), Articles 30, 77, 78]


 INQUÉRITO
(The inquiry or criminal investigation)

The “inquiry” (inquérito), led by a Public Prosecutor,is the stage that opens criminal proceedings with the purpose of investigating the possible perpetration of a crime, detecting its perpetrators and their responsibility and collecting evidence in view of a decision on whether there will be a formal charge or prosecution. 

Unlike in the previous system of criminal procedure where the inquiry was covered by legal secrecy, since 15 September 2007 - when new rules were enforced by Law 48/2007 which amended the Portuguese Code of Criminal Procedure -, the investigation is now public as a rule, except where the law specifically provides for the possibility of secrecy in order to safeguard: (i) the investigation aims; (ii) the rights of subjects or parties in proceedings (CCP, Article 86, paragraphs 2 and 3).


 INSTRUÇÃO
(The examining stage)

The arguido (or the assistente, i.e. the party assisting the public prosecutor) may request the opening of the examining stage (instrução) under the supervision of an Examining Judge (Juíz de Instrução), who may or may not confirm the well-grounded of the Public Prosecutor decision on whether to prosecute or to dismiss the case (CCP, Article 286, paragraph 1).

The application is not subject to any particular formalities, but should briefly indicate (CCP, Article 287, paragraph 2):

 the factual and legal reasons for disagreement as to the prosecution; and, if that is the case,

 which investigative acts the applicant believes should be carried out, what evidence should be taken into consideration and what facts are expected to be proven thereby.

The application may only be rejected as being extemporaneous, by lack of jurisdiction of the judge or by legal inadmissibility of the examining stage (CCP, Article 287, paragraph 3).

This stage is concluded by a preliminary hearing before the Examining Judge, which is attended by the Public Prosecutor, the defendant, the defence counsel, the party assisting the public prosecutor and his/her lawyer (CCP, Article 289).

After the preliminary hearing, the Judge decides on whether or not to submit the case to a criminal court for trial (CCP, Article 308).

Offline misty

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #282 on: September 12, 2020, 01:23:24 AM »
the defendant...in respect of the facts that are prosescuted by the prosecuter..

so the defendant can make the request to challenge th efacts that they are being prosecuted for...thats it. Not to simply keep the case going...its  avery specific provision.

once the case is shelved the McCanns are no longer arguidos, are not being charged with anything and then have nothing they can callenge


Unfortunately mistys file doesnt appear in the quote so I will provide a link to the original post.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11725.msg617575#msg617575


I havent looked at the link gunit has posted but im pretty sure it will say exactly as ive predicted...it will say defendants...but it has  a caveat

Sorry, link is http://www.ecba.org/extdocserv/projects/JusticeForum/Portugal180309.pdf   Page 6/18

Offline Mr Gray

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #283 on: September 12, 2020, 07:09:55 AM »
Article 286

Purpose and scope of the preliminary judicial stage

1 - The purpose of the preliminary judicial stage is to have the Examining Judge confirm the decision to
prosecute or to discontinue the proceedings with a view to establishing whether the case is to be tried in
a higher court.
https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/6422/file/Portugal_CPC_am2015_excerpts_en.pdf

How many timed do you need to be told before you understand..

The defendant has the right to challenge the decision to prosecute

The prosecutor has the right to challenge discontinuation

It's as simple as that

The McCanns had no right to reopen the case
Anne G got it wrong... And so have you

Offline G-Unit

Re: When was Murat ruled out?
« Reply #284 on: September 12, 2020, 09:21:51 AM »
How many timed do you need to be told before you understand..

The defendant has the right to challenge the decision to prosecute

The prosecutor has the right to challenge discontinuation

It's as simple as that

The McCanns had no right to reopen the case
Anne G got it wrong... And so have you

Why would the prosecutor want to challenge discontinuation when that was his own decision?
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0