"Leonor Cipriano court started today for making false statements."-03/2013 Joana Morais.Updated 2 /04 :Leonor Cipriano condemned ...

tanszi wrote:i dont think that quite correct Panda. i think its because he didnt make a report about it, because he didnt know about it. ill see it i can find something.

Hi tanszi, I wasn't swearing at the T.V. today.... Wales won handsomely.
By all means check because I wouldn't know where to start , but I'm sure it was something to do with the Detectives accused of hitting Leonor and Amaral knowingly signed a false Report......14 months is a long suspended sentence so he must have been guilty of something.

I know about Wales - hoarse here. I m not sure where to look but somehow ill find it.

tanszi wrote:I know about Wales - hoarse here. I m not sure where to look but somehow ill find it.

I wouldn.t know either but I'm sure one of our clever Members will find it and post it so not to worry , just take spmething for your throat.

mariaccnr ‏@mariaccnr 3m
The Court of Faro on Tuesday condemned Leonor Cipriano to seven months in prison for making false statements to Justice, found TVI.

Google translation:

Leonor Cipriano is serving 16 years for killing and hiding the corpse of her daughter
The Court of Faro on Tuesday condemned Leonor Cipriano to seven months in prison for making false statements to the Court , found TVI. The defendant already fulfills a sentence of 16 years in prison for the murder of her daughter Joana .

A reading of the judgment was scheduled for March 14, but the court postponed the date by joining the need for documentary evidence of this process earlier, in which Leonor Cipriano accused several agents to have beaten during interrogation.

The child's mother, who disappeared in the village of Figueira, Portimão, the September 12, 2004, presented different versions of the alleged assault he suffered at the premises of the Judicial Police in Faro that year.

The contradictory statements were made ​​during the trial that investigated the inspectors' if Joana 'in 2009, which resulted in the conviction of two of the five defendants in the case.

In its judgment, the collective of judges considered "relevant and flagrant contradictions it incurred» Leonor Cipriano statements that produced the sessions of the trial, although it had the "opportunity to reveal the truth."

The court gave as proven aggression, although without having ascertained the identity of the attackers.

Gonçalo Amaral, former coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department of the PJ of Portimão, was acquitted of the crime of failure to report abuse and sentenced to a year and a half for the crime of making false allegations, were suspended for the same period.

Inspector Antonio Nunes Cardoso was sentenced to two years and three months for forgery of document, sentence suspended for two years.

The former agents of PJ Paulo Pereira Cristovao Morgado Leonel Marques and Paulo Marques Bom, who were accused of having tortured Leonor Cipriano in interrogations conducted in Faro PJ, were acquitted.

Leonor Cipriano meets as her brother, João Cipriano, 16 years in prison for murder and concealment of a corpse.

... see full story at: tvi24.iol.pt.ultimas


Author: TVI24

http://www.passeiaki.com/noticias/caso-joana-mae-condenada-sete-meses-mentir-justica

Justice at last. The sentence against G.Amaral will probably be cancelled but how long will it take?

A good start, now for the rest!

Excellent!

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/04/leonor-cipriano-condemned-to-seven-more.html

Leonor Cipriano condemned to seven more months in jail for false accusations
2 April 2013 | Posted by Joana Morais Leave a Comment



Expresso cover in 2005, Leonor Cipriano "torture" article
written by Marinho Pinto the current head of the bar

The Court of Faro condemned today Leonor Cipriano to seven more months in jail for making false accusations in the process which incriminated five Judiciary Police officers of the crimes of aggression and torture.

This jail sentence is added to the 16 years that the arguida is serving for the murder of her daughter Joana - who disappeared from the village of Figueira, in Portimão, on September 12 2004 - and of which she has served about half.

According to the court, it was proved that Leonor Cipriano lied about the way in which the officers had beaten her, having presented in trial different versions of the facts that took place during the questionings to which she was subjected to, in 2004, after the crime.

According to the judge who delivered the judgement today, despite not having taken oath, the arguida in the quality of assistant to the process, was warned that she could not misrepresent the truth, at the risk of being punished and if she had done it, she did it "because she wanted" and in a conscient manner.

The court considered the illegality of the act committed takes on a "grave aspect" and is "above average", given the long sentence the arguida is serving, the seriousness of the facts, the quality of the arguidos [the five PJ officers accused by Leonor Cipriano] and the media coverage of the case.

"It is crystal clear the arguida misrepresented the truth [lied]", states the ruling, which highlights the several contradictions relative to the manner in which she alleges she was beaten and to the agents that were present in the interrogation room where she alleged to have been attacked.

The possibility of a suspended prison sentence was dismissed because the court considered that, despite the long jail sentence that the arguida is already serving, she continued to show disrespect for the rules.

The court also added that it would be "naive" to believe that a "mere threat" of imprisonment would contribute yo the "recovery" of the arguida, who was waived today of appearing in court to hear the reading of the judgement.

The contradictory statements about the aggressions that she was a target were made between 2008 and 2009, at the time of the trial1 of the inspectors who investigated the "Joana Case", which resulted in the condemnation of two of the five arguidos in that process.

That court gave has proves the aggressions even though the identity of the attackers were never established.

Gonçalo Amaral, the former coordinator of the Criminal Department of Investigation of the Judiciary Police of Portimão was absolved of the crime of omission to denunciate [failing to complaint] and condemned to one and a half year for the crime of false statement, with a suspended sentence for the same period time.

The inspector António Nunes Cardoso was condemned to two years and three months for the falsification of a document, with a suspended sentence of two years.

The former Judiciary Police inspectors Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, Leonel Morgado Marques and Paulo Marques Bom, who were accused of having tortured Leonor Cipriano in the questionings2 made by at the headquarters of the PJ of Faro, were all absolved.

In jail, Leonor Cipriano is attending the 9th grade of school and has still as an activity the placement of label in fruit cases, the court said adding that the detainee does not receive visits from friends or family.

Leonor's brother, João Cipriano, is also serving a 16 years jail sentence for the crimes of homicide and concealment of a corpse.

in Lusa news agency/TVI, April 2 2013

Notes
1 - Leonor Cipriano's lawyer at the time of the trial against the five Judiciary Police inspectors was Marcos Aragão Correia who had a pivotal role intertwining the Maddie and the Joana cases; the Lawyers Order bar, Marinho Pinto, timely requested to become assistant for the accusation and was represented by Rodrigo Santiago, thus annulling the possibility of asking Marinho Pinto to testify in relation to the Expresso 2005 "torture" article pictured above.

2 - Leonor Cipriano had already confessed to her crimes on October 13 2004, and was accompanied by her lawyer at the time, Célia Costa, during the questioning before the alleged aggressions on October 14 2004 took place.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related

ab) at a certain point in time, due to a motive that has not been exactly established, both arguidos started, conjointly, to successively hit minor CC on the head, prompting her to hit her head on the wall’s corner, being visible that she bled, from her mouth, her nose and her temple, due to the hits against the wall, which also caused the minor’s fall and her death, thus ceasing the arguidos’ activity;

ac) traces of blood from the minor remained on the living room’s walls and floor, on various spots, and also near the entrance;

ad) the arguidos ensured that CC was dead, verifying that she neither breathed nor reacted, and then, not wanting to be held responsible over their daughter’s and niece’s death, decided to prevent said death from becoming known to others;

ae) therefore, they soon decided that they would have to ensure that the existence of any signs in the house of what they had just done could not be verified, that the minor’s body would never be found and that, preferably, everyone would be convinced that the minor had been taken by a third party;

af) therefore, arguida BB remained at home, washing the wall and the floor that had signs of blood from CC, as well as the spot where the minor remained slumped after death, using a mop and its bucket to do so.

(...)

aah) the arguidos managed to disturb the investigative activities and prevented the mortal remains of minor CC, whose life they took, from being located;

aai) the aforementioned activities were carried out by the arguidos under concerted efforts and intentions, in a deliberate, free and conscious manner, fully knowing that those behaviours are punished by law;

aaj) therefore as far as taking the life of CC, their direct relative (daughter and niece), is concerned, which they did by employing force, taking advantage of the fact that she couldn’t defend herself (taking into account her age and physical built) and using force in the full knowledge that, considering the vital area in which her body was hit (the head) repeatedly and violently, prompting the minor’s head to hit the wall, they could take her life away from her, a consequence which they accepted, still not ceasing their activity;

aal) not seeing as an obstacle the circumstance that the minor depended on her mother and was a direct relative of both, and should be defended instead of victimised by them;

aam) in the same deliberate, free and conscious manner, and knowing that such behaviour is punishable, they carried out the above described action of cutting CC’s body, demonstrating total insensibility, knowing full well that, in this manner, they offended the communitarian respect that is due to the dead, acting with the purpose of CC’s body never being found again, hiding it in a location that is not appropriated for the effect, in order to try to avoid responsibility for her death;

Extracts from Supreme Court of Justice - ruling on the Homicide and concealment of eight-year-old Joana Cipriano's body, 20.04.2006 [in Portuguese here]

I,m playing catch up here but Amaral was charged with giving a false Report about his officers and given a 14 month suspended Jail Sentence which I thought was quite seperate to this case. Is there a link whereby if cipriano is found to have lied and not been beaten by the Police, does this affect Amaral's case?

Mr amaral DIDN'T give a false Report, didn't give any report because he didn't know it had happened .


The judge even stipulated that how can he give a report about something he didn't know anything about .

Whether he wrote a report about it later when he found out about it I don't know, I assume he did.


But it's quite obvious to me, if they were all on trial together then it was ONE case and if one didn't happen then the other didn't....so if he wrote a report a couple off days after, let's not forget....HE WASNT EVEN THERE when this supposed assault happened so how can he write a report anyway.

kitti wrote:Mr amaral DIDN'T give a false Report, didn't give any report because he didn't know it had happened .


The judge even stipulated that how can he give a report about something he didn't know anything about .

Whether he wrote a report about it later when he found out about it I don't know, I assume he did.


But it's quite obvious to me, if they were all on trial together then it was ONE case and if one didn't happen then the other didn't....so if he wrote a report a couple off days after, let's not forget....HE WASNT EVEN THERE when this supposed assault happened so how can he write a report anyway.

Kitti, I may be wrong but I thought he falsified statements from the Police regardiing how cipriani got her injuries.

How is it falsifying a report when he wrote the report from the police officers account that were there.


He wasnt even there so he wrote the report when he got there.

kitti wrote:How is it falsifying a report when he wrote the report from the police officers account that were there.


He wasnt even there so he wrote the report when he got there.

I'm sure there is something about it in the mccannfiles but I would be a month of Sundays trying to find it so will wait for NBY to come along.