"Gentleman, we are going ahead. This was a decision which should have been finished in two days and we still haven't moved much at all," affirmed this morning the president of the collective judges, Henrique Pavão, who is driving the judgement of the case of alleged aggressions against Leonor Cipriano.
The phrase arose as a result of the presentation of various requests, by both the accused (in this case, by the assistent Leonor Cipriano) as well as the defense, in a juridic wave of requests for certificates and interrogations of new witnesses and of threats of suits and countersuits.
Marcos Aragão Correia, Leonor Cipriano's lawyer, began by accusing Gonçalo Amaral of having lied to the court when questioned in the prior seesion whether he knew of any other suit against him. Amaral affirmed he did not, but Aragão Correia guarantees that he did know: "On 25 September, Leandro Silva (Joana's stepfather) brought a criminal complaint against Gonçalo Amaral for defamation, for having said that Leandro raped Joana. Questioned by the "O Crime" journal, Amaral said that it would be good, to wake up that process (of the Public Ministry against Leandro, since archived), however he deliberately lied", he said, advancing with the possibility of suing the inspector for false witness.
Deliberately mixing the "Joana Case" with the "Maddie Case", searching for the lowest common denominator -- Gonçalo Amaral -- the lawyer even put forth that Leandro Silva already knew a week beforehand that Amaral would be removed from the coordination of the "Maddie Case", but Amaral's lawyer quickly counter-attacked: "If Amaral is a target to be shot down, who is going to do it? Will it be Leonor Cipriano or foreign companies, perhaps Metodo3?", he asked. Confronted with the question, Aragão confirmed that he did, in fact, colaborrate with the Spanish firm in the searches for Madeleine McCann.
Leonor says that Amaral hit her
Contradicting prior depositions, Leonor Cipriano affirmed this afternoon, in front of the court jury, that Gonçalo Amaral had in fact beaten her, explaining that she only now remembered this fact when she saw the TV report in which her husband, Leandro, referred to the subject. Gonçalo Amaral's defense then requested the reading of earlier depositions in which Leonor had affirmed that she had never seen Gonçalo Amaral on that day.
Leonor Cipriano's defense tried to bring in as witnesses the legal doctor Pinto da Costa and the ex-police officer Barra da Costa, was well as the ex-director of PJ, Alípio Ribeiro, in addition to Leandro Silva, his wife and daughter, amongst others who he guaranteed had been the target of "inhumane treatment" by some of the arguidos now in court.
The court denied the request, alleging that none of the people would have direct knowledge about the facts specific to this process.
The defense lawyers for the inspectors have already tried to explore the contradictions in Cipriano's depositions, soliciting the reading of her confession to the crime at the interrogation headquarters, during the process in which Leonor was condemned for the homicide of her daughter. Once again, the judge denied the request, alleging that these related to different processes and that in this one the only thing under consideration are the alleged aggressions.
In the afternoon, after the questioning of Leonor Cipriano, four witnesses were heard, two PJ employees, the lawyer who was present during Cipriano's interrogation in the "Joana Case" and António Maia, employee at the Odemira Prison. The declarations of this last witness brought up a new process... of intentions. Because António Maia, the employee in question, wrote a memo in which he referred to Leonor Cipriano only having bruises on her face when she arrived at the Prison and that she said she had fallen down the stairs. According to the witness, Ana Maria Calado, Director of Odemira Prison, had told him 15 days later "with harsh comments" to correct the document which did not correspond to the truth.
Pragal Colaço then requested a complete certificate of the deposition, in order to advance with a countersuit against the Prison Director.