JOANA CIPRIANO - Aged 8 years - Figueira (Portugal)

Posted by merlynsam
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2008 11:48 am

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

October 17, 2008

Cipriano Case: The Joana case Returns to Court

By Duarte Levy

Nothing in common with Maddie

António Pragal Colaço, the lawyer defending the Lisbon-based Polícia Judiciária (PJ) inspectors who have been accused by the public prosecutor of having tortured Leonor Cipriano, told journalists that his clients will be tried “for a political reason”.

Inspectors Leonel Marques, Pereira Cristóvão and Paulo Bom are accused of torture. The fourth, António Cardoso, is accused of falsifying documents for having allegedly lied in the report of what had happened to Joana’s mother.

Joana’s mother has never accused Gonçalo Amaral - the only inspector from the Algarve PJ headquarters - of aggression, as several British media have claimed in an attempt to draw a parallel between the Cipriano and the Madeleine McCann cases. The inspector, who is still waiting to hear whether he will face trial or not, is being heard in court for not having reported the alleged attack. However, despite the fact that Gonçalo Amaral coordinated the investigation, his lawyer, Antonio Cabrita, considers that he does not have “the obligation to know everything”. As he pointed out, if this were the case, then the PJ’s national and assistant national directors would also have to be charged.

Following the preliminary session last Monday at the court in Faro, the judge, Ana Lucia Cruz, has ten days to decide which inspectors will face trial and for what charges.

While Leonor Cipriano, sentenced to 16 years in prison for the murder of her daughter, claims to have been attacked and tortured by three Lisbon inspectors, the PJ has always affirmed that Joana’s mother wanted to commit suicide by throwing herself from the top of the stairs.

The lawyer of the three inspectors accused of torture made reference to a French physician’s report on Diana’s death in Paris in 1997, which confirmed that injuries to the princess’s eyes and face were caused as a result of her car accident. This thus reinforces the possibility that the bruises on Leonor Cipriano’s face could have resulted from her suicide attempt, as the inspectors have always claimed.

Joana’s death

Joana Isabel Cipriano Guerreiro was eight years old the day she disappeared. Her mother and her uncle were tried and sentenced for her death despite the fact that the body was never found.

One month after Joana’s disappearance, the PJ’s national director decided to send three inspectors to Faro to find Joana. By this time her mother and uncle had already confessed to the crime, but had not revealed where her body was. Leonor and João Cipriano were again questioned, but revealed nothing further concerning the body’s whereabouts.

The enquiry revealed that João, Joana’s uncle, is a manipulator and is violent under the influence of alcohol. On the day his niece disappeared, he had spent the afternoon drinking. João and Leonor are part of a family that people in the neighbourhood describe as very strange, with an alleged history “of sexual relationships between the children (brothers and sisters) and their parents, domestic violence and possible consanguinity.”

According to the enquiry, João had had a sexual relationship with both his twin sister, Anabela, and with Leonor, whose mother had forced her into prostitution. At the time of the event, Leonor had three children living with her (including Joana) and a fourth one with whom she was no longer in contact.

To explain their crime, João and Leonor Cipriano stated that Joana had seen them having sex and threatened to report it to her stepfather. The PJ did not accept this explanation as their enquiry pointed to the fact that Joana loved her mother and would probably have kept quiet about the incident.

The investigation concluded that João had raped his niece in front of her passive mother, and that they both beaten the child, thus causing her death. This would explain why they hid the body: João preferred to admit that he had killed Joana rather than to say that he had raped her. Without the body there would be no possibility of proving rape.

João Cipriano admitted aggressing Joana, first to the inspectors and later to his lawyer, and that she “remained on the floor without moving”. However, while the mother pretended to search for her daughter with her boyfriend, he also admitted that he was the one who chopped up the body, hid it in a car that was to go to a scrap-yard, which was then taken to Spain where it was burned and compacted.

This is the account that João Cipriano gave to the inspectors and repeated the next day in the presence of his lawyer. But when they asked him whether he had abused his niece, he answered indignantly: “I didn’t harm her, I just killed her.”

Forensic scientists found the sandals that her mother had said Joana was wearing at the time of her disappearance in the little girl’s home. They also found traces of her face and her hands on the walls, which confirmed her uncle’s statements. Traces of blood were found on the floor and in the refrigerator where João said he had kept the body before moving it to the car. Biological traces - possibly of sperm - were found in Joana’s bed and in a pair of the child’s underwear.

Thinking that João had already confessed, Leonor admitted the facts during her interrogation, and then turned to a photograph of Joana that was stuck on the wall, asking her for forgiveness.

She allegedly then became uncontrollable and shouted that she wanted to kill herself. It appears that the inspector was still busy writing the interrogation report when he heard shouting. According to this inspector, his colleagues told him that Leonor had attempted suicide by throwing herself down the stairs. She was examined by a doctor and then remanded in custody.

The following day the police received an anonymous phone call informing them that people inside the prison were trying to convince Leonor to say that she had been attacked by the inspectors: the prison director sent a letter with photographs of Leonor to the national director of the PJ and to the press, accusing the inspectors of aggression.

A letter sent by another prisoner contradicts this version: she affirms that, while in prison, Joana’s mother had said that she had fallen down the stairs but that after a meeting with the prison director, she changed her version and said instead that she had been tortured and that she hoped to receive damages.

Despite several confrontations with the inspectors, Leonor Cipriano was unable to make any positive identification. The public prosecutor nonetheless decided to proceed with the lawsuit, even though he admitted that he, himself, could not guarantee that the inspectors being charged had anything to do with the alleged assault or whether any such assault had even actually taken place.

The inspectors’ lawyer and Carlos Anjos, president of the Association of Criminal Investigation Staff consider the public prosecutor’s decision to be politically motivated.

Translated by Astro

Source: with the Courtesy of Duarte Levy

Posted on: http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/

Posted by merlynsam
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2008 11:49 am

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

Correio da Manhã

October 18, 2008

Jury selected

Justice: Trial of PJ inspectors starts on the 24th at Faro Court

A municipal fireman, a financial technician that works at a hospital, a chauffeur and a golf course receptionist. These are the four members of the public that compose the jury that will try five Polícia Judiciária inspectors, at Faro Court, starting next Friday, the 24th.

Leonel Lopes, Pereira Cristóvão and Marques Bom stand accused of torture upon Leonor Cipriano, who was condemned over the murder of her daughter Joana. Nunes Cardoso faces an accusation of document forgery and former coordinator Gonçalo Amaral is suspected of false testimony and omission of denunciation.

Jury selection took place yesterday, at Faro Court, with the choice of four effective jurors and four substitutes, after the 16 persons that had been drawn as potential members of the jury. Initially they were 18, but one of the jurors had a criminal record (which impeded him from becoming a juror) and a lady that had been called due to an apparent mistake of the court.

Leonor Cipriano’s new lawyer, Marcos Aragão Correia, presented a request for protection to be given to himself, to Joana’s mother (who is detained at the prison in Odemira, surrounded by dozens of prison guards) and the “ten accusation witnesses”. “There have been indirect threats”, he accused, citing a press article where he states that Pereira Cristóvão compared him “to the dog and that he should be given a slap on the back”.

Pragal Colaço, the lawyer who represents four of the inspectors, replied by saying that “one should not come to court thinking it’s a child’s play”. António Cabrita, Gonçalo Amaral’s lawyer, commented by stating that “idiocy is free in this country”.

Details

Substitutes – The four substitute jurors are to follow the trial in case it becomes necessary to substitute one of the effective jurors.

Witnesses – The present director of the PJ, former director Santos Cabral and the joint national director of Faro, Guilhermino Encarnação, are some of the defense witnesses.

Lawsuits – Aragão Correia has three lawsuits filed against him. To CM he stated that those are defamation suits, that have been filed by the Judiciária inspectors.

Translated by Astro

Source:
Correio da Manhã, 18.10.2008

Posted by pamsupportfromireland
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2008 8:25 pm

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

Thanks Merly,very soon so.

Posted by Tezza
Posted: Sat Oct 25, 2008 4:39 pm

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

Trial postponed


Breaking news

Trial of PJ inspectors accused of "torturing" Leonor Cipriano has been postponed for October 27, apparently due to the death of a family member of one of the judges.

(more to follow)



by Joana Morais

Posted by pam supportfromireland
Posted: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:15 pm

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

Thanks Tezza for update. Hope not postponed too long.

Posted by Tezza
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:34 pm

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

Expresso
25/10/08

Was it the PJ that left Leonor like this?

Veracity of the photos is questioned by the inspectors’ defense. Accusation was based on medical examinations

by * See photos on website

Fourteen photos. 14 photos that show Leonor Cipriano covered in bruises. 14 photos that are part of the process that involves five present and former PJ inspectors. 14 photos that defense lawyer Pragal Colaço now says were altered. But which he didn’t dispute in the process. Yesterday, the first session of the trial at the Court of Faro was postponed.

“Look at this, those are not photographs, those are prints from digital JPEG files. One cannot carry out medical analyses over prints. If I could, I would bring Steve Ballmer (Microsoft’s boss) over and he could tell you whether or not it’s possible to manipulate the photos”, stated Pragal Colaço, the lawyer who represents four of the five inspectors. The argument for not having disputed them until now was the lack of time.

The prosecutor for the Public Ministry, António Correia, who was contacted by Expresso, declined to make a statement.

Leonor Cipriano identified two of the arguidos but stated that none of them aggressed her. The accusation sustains that the suspects used third persons who beat the plaintiff. None of them has been identified.

The medical reports that are included in the process point into the same direction: the markings on Leonor’s body were not compatible with falling off the stairs.

The first observation of Leonor Cipriano was made by a doctor at the Health Centre of Odemira on the very same day of the supposed aggressions – the 15th of October 2004, and excluded de possibility of a fall. Milcíades Carvalho only observed Leonor’s face but referred that the lesions that she presented “are not compatible with falling off the stairs, but with one single, very heavy blow, like hitting the head against a wall”.

On the 18th of October, Leonor Cipriano was observed by Irene Posalaky, a doctor at Odemira Prison, for whom “the lesions that were observed could not result from a fall of the stairs, because they are never symmetrical (like the ones that the prisoner had) or nice and round”. The doctor referred that despite not being an expert in forensics medicine, she had already contacted with several victims of domestic violence that presented lesions that resembled those of the prisoner.

A second report, dated the 25th of February 2005, which was based on the former medical reports, on photographs, on examinations and on Leonor’s clinical file, concluded in the same sense, that the lesions “suggest multiple and repeated aggressions”.

The last report in the process that Expresso consulted, which was written by the Counsel for Forensics Medicine, concluded in the same sense, adding that the “black eyes” strongly suggest being the result of fist blows and that the other aggressions were produced by kicks. This report was based on the clinical records and on the photographs.

In order to prove torture, the accusation to this evidence the deposition where Leonor Cipriano refers that she was beaten to her head with a carton tube that was approximately 1 metre long. Leonor allegedly had a blue plastic bag over her head, so she could not see who was beating her, and further referred that she was forced to kneel on two ashtrays.

Natália Silva, an employee at Odemira Prison where Leonor is fulfilling her sentence, referred that she saw “something that resembled creases”, but she erased those photographs “because no bruises, red areas, injuries or bleeding cuts were visible”.

The defense’s version sustains that Leonor Cipriano confessed her will to commit suicide and that when she went to the toilet she threw herself off the stairs at the Polícia Judiciária in Faro. The defense further alleges that Leonor had already confessed to the crime on the day before, the 13th of October 2004, and ‘holds’ to the fact that Leonor failed to identify any of the arguidos.

Nevertheless, according to the process, on the 13th Leonor confessed to the existence of the crime but blamed her brother, João Cipriano, who had also confessed to the crime already. But the main piece of evidence that would complement the confessions remained undiscovered: Joana’s body. Maybe that was why, even after the alleged fall (or the aggressions) Leonor did not go directly to prison. On her way, she passed through Figueira and Alvor, because according to the Judiciária she wanted to identify the body’s whereabouts.

Joana’s body was never found but Leonor Cipriano and her brother, João, ended up condemned to 16 years in prison over homicide and cadaver concealment.


Source: Expresso, 25.10.2008
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/1 ... -this.html

Posted by Tezza
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:45 pm

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

Diario de Noticias



Lawyer of inspectors believe that photos are manipulated



JOSE MANUEL OLIVEIRA

If Leonor Cipriano. Start of trial yesterday postponed to next Monday
Leonor Cipriano arrived at the Court of Faro around 09.45, well after the time set for the trial. The five inspectors from the PJ (some already outside the institution) accused of having ordered the attacks mother of Joan in investigations of the disappearance also marked presence in court. But the trial would be postponed to next Monday because of the death of the family of one of the judges.

On the door of the court, the lawyers did not fail to re-fence arguments. And in focus yesterday was the new photos with the alleged assaults on Leonor Cipriano, photos, which the lawyer for four of the five defendants, including Paul Christopher, Anthony Randfontein Colaço, being reminded of the digital age, once subject to manipulation. "There are views of files in JPEG (image), not impressions are analog," shot Colaço Randfontein, while the photographs showed. "We are very complicated to set a precedent in court. At least, they could have done as it should be an investigation. The MP should present evidence, but do not have," charges Randfontein Colaço.

Antonio Cabrita, lawyer of the accused Gonçalo Amaral, did not want to talk about the alleged manipulation of photos, but again stress that the inspectors are "scapegoats" in this process. Already the lawyer for Leonor Cipriano, Marcos Aragao Correia, denied the theory of manipulation. "There are maneuvers of those who do not have anything else to make," said the DN, reacting to statements from Randfontein Colaço. Forensic experts close to the process to ensure that the DN lesions visible in the photos are results of aggression.

Aragon Correia also spoke of his strategy for the trial, ahead that it first wants to "prove that Leonor was tortured by the Judicial and then, yes, ask to review the sentence" the mother of Joana, who is arrested for the murder of her daughter, but so far the body has not appeared. | with MC

http://tinyurl.com/64zfvk

Posted by pam supportfromireland
Posted: Thu Oct 30, 2008 11:53 am

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

Portugal Resident

30 October 2008

Integrity of G. Amaral questioned in police brutality case


http://www.portugalresident.com/portugalresident/showstory.asp?ID=30050

Posted by Tezza
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:02 pm

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

EDITORIAL
When the trials are not in court

5/11/08
The trial of Leonor Cipriano continues not only in the courtroom, but more strangely, in the media. There are newspapers that apparently take the side of one party and fill its pages with the protagonists on that side, some for the defense, and some others the prosecution. Interviewing witnesses, along with the judge in the case, analyzing evidence, exploiting contradictions in a parallel pursuit of justice that seems (to say the least) exotic. Already in the case of Maddie the exact same maneuvers can be perceived, with strangely, or perhaps not, some investigators common to both processes.

Apparently, in Portugal, impartiality only counts in politics and imagine the hysteria of the ERC, and the guardians of the process, if the media clearly took a position for or against a candidate for the presidency of the Republic, but the picture seems to change when it comes to a matter of Justice. There does not appear to be either self-regulation nor scruples, as I had, in fact, found in the McCann case: even after the closure of the case and the lifting of the defendant status of the parents, there remained some newspapers hammering on the theory that didn't convince the courts, using the most shameful tricks.

The case becomes even more glaring when the accusation is made by a simple woman (and with obvious intellectual limitations) like Leonor Cipriano, and the defense by detectives from the PJ, and good lawyers. In less than anything you can [Virar o bico ao prego]idiom= imply without saying] even before the trial has started, the view that everything is just a scheme (for what purpose is unknown). This insinuates even the director of the prison where the Joana's mother was, who denounced the state in which one of their prisoners returned from the "squad", and who is now transformed into an accomplice of Leonor Cipriano.

Proving that what at the time was considered an act of courage of the lady is just that, because applying to conduct an investigation of a police officer is seen as a daring risk. For whose revenge apparently some journalists gang together.

Isabel Stilwell editorial@destak.pt

Correio da Manha

25th November 2008

Leonor: Former Inmate says that Joana's mother always spoke about a fall

When she arrived to the Odemira Prison (EPO) with bruises on her face, Leonor Cipriano, always "said that those were the consequence by a fall in the stairs". The statement is from Osvalda Concelos [on the image], former prison inmate, which testified at the fifth court session of the trial of the five PJ inspectors accused of torture, in Faro.

"Only after a conversation with the Director of the EPO [Ana Maria Calado] she started talking about aggressions", said Osvalda Concelos, who states that she over heard the conversation and to whom it seemed that "it was the director who talked about the possibility of Leonor receiving a compensation".

"But I felled in the stairs, am I going to say that I was beaten?", asked Joana's mother before she changed her version, according to Osvalda Concelos.

As well, in yesterday's court session, a computer specialist stated that it is impossible to know if the photos where Leonor appears with bruises were doctored.

"The files that I analysed have the date of 9 May of 2005", explained Filipe Custódio, when the photos were taken in October 2004. Thus, and for their lack of quality, the expert affirmed that is not possible to know if they were changed.

The forensic psychologist, Paulo Sargento, based on a Forensic Medicine Institute report, affirmed that Leonor Cipriano has "psychopathic" characteristics.

Translated by xklamation

Source: Correio da Manhã

Well that is interesting. I can't dispute the psychiatrist's findings about psychosis tendencies which sounds very scary indeed. I can however dispute the cell mate feedback as don't believe it & do question this computer expert is the best out there about the doctoring question. Hmm if this was an Interpol or FBI expert would the answer be the same? Can't be sure if doctored or not.

Well I asked my hubby as has an interest in this area.

He says experts can never be 100% sure but can give an opinion & then the jury decides themselves.

Here is a very interesting article, I wonder if this level of expertise was used for the Trial in Portugal?

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=5-ways-to-spot-a-fake

Diario de Noticias

7th January 2009

By Licinio LIMA

"The Public Prosecutor office fell into a trap"

Interview.
For the first time, one of the PJ inspectors accused of ordering the assault of Leonor Cipriano, mother of Joana, talks about the trial.

You are accused of having tortured a woman together with a group of policemen and former policemen. How do you feel?

We are very offended. But the Public Prosecutor (MP), shortly, will make clear that they fell into a trap. In any case, the accusation is not of
physical torture, but of the "having ordered it," that is, we are accused of facilitating the access to someone unknown, who has entered
the building of the police to assault the lady.

To the public that is not clear.

Mrs Leonor Cipriano's complaint is that someone has beaten her; throughout the process she gave six versions. During the trial she had two more. But the facts have already begun to be dissected by the MP and he has now realized that he was fooled.

The process is a conspiracy against PJ?

I do not believe in cabals. But I saw that there was a sequence of events in the two weeks before we get to the Algarve and that they were used to cover problems.

What problems?

We have a prison in Odemira that was about to be subjected to an inspection, following several complaints by prison guards against the director. This, in itself, already shows that something goes wrong. Now, if you know at any time that the most media exposed prisoner shows marks of aggression, that does not seem to help for a good result of the inspection.

Leonor Cipriano was assaulted or not?

She must have been assaulted on three or four different occasions. that is the conclusion the notes is the medico-legal expertise.

The marks in the eyes demonstrate attacks on more than one occasion?

Those marks in the eyes have already been explained by the experts. There is a strong impact against a wall. the haematoma goes down by force of gravity, hence the marks.

There are also marks on the body ...

We see marks with various types of development, with periods ranging between three and 18 days. And all this would not be alright except
for a little detail about which no one has spoken: that is, at the date of such attacks, we had been in the Algarve for two days only.

That means ...

If we want to ridicule the thing, that means that two or three weeks before, we were in Lisbon ordering the torture [of a person], when we
had nothing to do with that investigation yet.

Did you see the marks of aggression that Leonor Cipriano had on her body?

Neither we nor the medical-legal experts saw the body of the lady. The accusation is based on photographs. No one ever saw it, except those who had more interest in it being said that the PJ hit her, which is someone in prison in Odemira, where the photos were taken. So I think the MP fell into a trap.

Translated by Pear

http://dn.sapo.pt/2009/01/07/sociedade/o_ministerio_publico_caiu_logro.html

Lusa: Noticias

16.01.2009

Joana case: PJ inspectors’ trial returns to Faro Court today

Faro, Jan 16 (Lusa) – The trial of the alleged aggressions against Leonor Cipriano by Polícia Judiciária (PJ) inspectors returns to the bar of Faro Court today, in order not to interrupt the production of evidence, and continues next Thursday.

During the last session of the trial, which was held in mid-December, with the same purpose, Leonor Cipriano’s lawyer delivered a request in court for 16 witnesses to be heard, so the contradictory can be made.

The first witness that is presented within that request is Leonor Cipriano, an assistant in the process; the list of witnesses that Marcos Aragão Correia requests includes university professor of forensics Pinto da Costa, Public Ministry inspector Alípio Ribeiro and the director of the Prison of Odemira, Ana Maria Calado.

According to Joana’s mother’s lawyer, the request is based on the need to clarify “contradictions” from the assistant that were invoked by the arguidos and to clarify if she was injected with a drug at Faro Hospital, with the purpose of disturbing her capacity.

The process of the alleged aggressions on Leonor Cipriano by PJ inspectors is related to the so-called “Joana case”, which dates back to the 12th of September 2004, the day that the little girl, aged eight, disappeared from the village of Figueira, Portimão, Algarve.

The Public Ministry’s accusations against five former inspectors and inspectors of the Judiciária appeared following questioning sessions at the PJ in Faro in 2004, a time at which Leonor appeared at the Prison of Odemira, where she was under preventive detention, with lesions to her face and to her body.

Three inspectors stand accused of the crime of torture, one stands accused of the crime of false testimony and omission of denunciation, and a fifth stands accused of the crime of falsification of a document.

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


Original source: Lusa http://noticias.sapo.pt/lusa/artigo/0908848e379ad07f674174.html

Translated by Astro: http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/

SOS Maddie

Saturday, 17 January 2009

The Cipriano case: Joana was battered to death by her uncle.

The new witness statement has been written by Marcos Aragão.

Yesterday, the lawyer, Marcos Aragão Correia revealed to the press, outside the trial of the five PJ inspectors, a document signed by Léonor Cipriano, in which Joana's mother accuses her brother, João Cipriano, of being the sole perpetrator of the little girl's murder.

In this eight page document, written by hand by the lawyer, Léonor Cipriano explains that her brother convinced her to sell Joana, but that "the people didn't have the money promised (an amount Léonor has not revealed) and João did not hand over the girl.

(To read the complete document click here for the photos or the PDF).

Photos:
http://sosmaddie.dhblogs.be/album/nouveau-temoignage-ecrit-par-marcos-aragao/page1/

PDF:
http://multimedia.iol.pt/backoffice/oratvi/multimedia/doc/id/13105493//9?r

This umpteenth version is, according to Marcos Aragão, "the true story," Léonor's witness statement recounting exactly what allegedly happened to her daughter Joana, who disappeared in September 2004.

"When Joana left the house, the intention was to hand her over to the people and simulate a kidnapping," the lawyer states, explaining that her uncle, João Cipriano, had taken along the little girl's clothes in a large bag.

According to Marcos Aragão, Joana allegedly heard the whole discussion between João and the buyers, threatening her uncle, "that she was going to tell everything," after which, "he allegedly started battering her, finishing up killing her."

According to this new witness statement, written by Marcos Aragão, Léonor was not present at the time of Joana's death but João Cipriano allegedly confessed his crime to her: when he came home, he tried to hide the murder, but, at Léonor's insistence, who allegedly detected traces of blood on her brother's trousers, João ended up admitting having killed Joana and having hidden the body in a place close to the house before burying it the next day.

Umpteenth version targets Gonçalo Amaral, the former coordinator.

It was outside the trial of the five PJ inspectors that Marcos Aragão Correia - the same lawyer who stated that he had a vision that Maddie's body was in the deep waters of the Arade Dam - chose to present the document to the press, stressing that Léonor, "decided to leave this out and say that she knew nothing," because of, "her brother's threats," but that the confession of her participation in Joana's murder was allegedly made, "under torture," when she was interviewed by the PJ inspectors.

The new version of the events surrounding Joana's death will, meanwhile, be used by Léonor's lawyer to point the finger at former inspector, Gonçalo Amaral, officer for the disappearance and death of Joana in 2004 and of Madeleine McCann in 2007.

In the document which the lawyer wrote and Léonor signed, the former inspector is accused of knowing the truth: "If Mr Amaral knows it, then why did he ask people to beat me up? Why?"

In statements to the Portuguese press, the former coordinator of the PJ's DIC in Portimao, contented himself with saying that Léonor Cipriano was already considered to be a psychopath (see the video by the psychologist Paulo Sargento) and that she was lying, stressing that Joana's mother, as well as her brother João were tried and convicted for Joana's murder, all "the rest was lies being put about."

Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer, António Cabrita, goes further and after having considered that the document presented by Marcos Aragão had no relevance to the ongoing trial against the five inspectors, stated that he did not believe it was Léonor's work, but rather the work of someone else: "an obvious manipulation of the prisoner for other purposes," notably the sullying of Gonçalo Amaral's image.

Review of Léonor's conviction must await the end of Amaral's trial.

The request for review of Léonor and João Cipriano's convictions will await the final result of the trial of the five PJ inspectors, accused of having committed acts of torture during an interrogation, the day after Léonor's confession in the presence of her lawyer at the time.

In November 2005, the two siblings were sentenced, respectively, to 20 years and four months in prison and 19 years and two months. In May 2008, the Supreme Court of Justice reduced the sentences to 16 years and eight months in prison.

Source: http://sosmaddie.dhblogs.be/