25 May 2009

Joana case: court says that Leonor Cipriano lied


The Court of Faro will request the Public Ministry to open a judicial inquiry on Leonor Cipriano over the crime of false statements in the trial of present and former PJ inspectors within the “Joana case”.

In the ruling, that was read out on Friday and which the Lusa Agency accessed today, the collective of judges considered that the statements that Leonor Cipriano produced during the trial sessions contained “flagrant and relevant contradictions”, and therefore determined that a certificate should be extracted, to which a copy of the tape recordings was added.

In the verdict, it is mentioned that the mother of the child that disappeared on the 12th of September 2004, in the village of Figueira, in Portimão, “was offered (…) an extensive opportunity to reveal the truth” during the trial sessions at the Court of Faro, but “essentially seized the opportunity to lie”.

“Leonor Cipriano lied about the manner in which she was beaten, about the identification of the persons that beat her, about the time and the manner how she revealed that she had been beaten, in short, she lied about every essential aspect of the statements that she gave”, the verdict stresses.

Underlining that Leonor Cipriano presented “no plausible reason whatsoever to have done so”, the collective of three judges, presided by Henrique Pavão, considered that Joana’s mother revealed “major contradictions” and that she presented “very different versions for one and the same fact”.

The verdict, which will also be sent to the PJ’s Department of Discipline and Inspection, where an inquiry is being held against present inspectors António Cardoso and Paulo Marques Bom, considered the aggressions as proved, although without establishing the aggressors’ identity, and determined the condemnation of two of the five arguidos in the process.

Gonçalo Amaral, a former coordinator of the PJ’s Criminal Investigation Department in Portimão, who was acquitted of the crime of omission of denunciation, was condemned to one and a half years over the crime of false deposition, with a suspended sentence over a similar period.

Inspector António Nunes Cardoso, who is still in service, was condemned to two years and three months over forgery of document, with a suspended sentence over two years.

Former PJ inspectors Paulo Pereira Cristóvão and Leonel Morgado Marques and still inspector Paulo Marques Bom, who all stood accused of the crimes of torture against Leonor Cipriano, following the questioning at the PJ in Faro, in 2004, were acquitted.

Leonor Cipriano and her brother, João Cipriano, were condemned by the Supreme Court of Justice to 16 years in prison each, over the crimes of homicide and concealment of Joana’s cadaver.


source: Diário de Notícias, 25.05.2009

5 comments:

  1. Before Madaleine disappeared,
    everybody knew already that Leonor Cipriano was a compulsive patological lier.
    This is no news in Portugal.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm fed up of psychological terms for criminals.
    Or people who had a unhappy childhood.
    Since psychologists and psychiatrists came to this world, everybody can escape from responsibilities.

    ReplyDelete
  3. WTFJIT?!?

    JIT - Justice is this.

    Textusa

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I started thinking about the ruling that was handed down to Mr. Amaral. I found this ruling comparable to the ruling that was made by the Portuguese Public Ministry with regard to the Madeleine case. Both rulings contained contradictions. The Portuguese Public Ministry absolved the couple saying they were innocent because their behaviour was seen to be normal. We all know that their behaviour was far from normal and that they didn't cooperate with the police. However the point is that no respectable justice system would convict or acquit someone based on that someone's behaviour and therefore absolving this couple based on their behaviour makes it even stranger. I won't even comment on how the Portuguese Public Ministry concluded that the girl died and that abduction was impossible. It is my understanding that Mr. Amaral was charged with failing to denounce a crime and falsification of documents. He was found guilty of falsifying his report on how Miss Cipriano suffered her injuries. The rational was that Mrs. Cipriano was beaten and that Mr. Amaral knew this to be the case but altered his report to protect his subordinates. Think! If the justice system concluded that Mr. Amaral falsified his report because he knew that Miss Cipriano had been beaten, shouldn't he also have been found guilty of failing to denounce a crime? Why didn't this happen? The reason is because that would take focus off the ruling that those running this case wanted you the public to focus on, that is that he falsified a report. In other words if he did it in this case he did it in the Madeleine case. If you read the British papers falsifying a report is written as falsifying evidence. We are told that the conclusions that a beating had taken place were based on an expert's opinion on photographs of Miss. Cipriano. Of course Mr. Marinho Pinto the person who first brought these pictures to the attention of the public couldn't be questioned by the defence because, conveniently, he was basically running the trial.

    Because of the sentence that Mr. Amaral received, I guess the British media will now ask us
    to believe that Mr. Amaral was sprinkling cadaver fluid in the McCann's apartment, on their
    clothing and vehicle. I guess we are supposed to ignore the fact that this fluid provided a
    good match with Madeleine's DNA profile and of course we are supposed to dismiss Mr.Amaral's documentary and books as fiction.

    What do I conclude from all this? In making these rulings the Portuguese justice system has
    brought itself into disrepute and the British media, which does not allow free speech, is complicit in covering up a crime.

    ReplyDelete