In the court, Leonor Cipriano sometimes ‘remembered’ and sometimes ‘forgot’. Mostly, she simply fabricated stories or told outright lies, as she has done for years
For example, she said that she had seen who had assaulted her, but later she denied this.
During the investigation into Joana Cipriano’s disappearance, Ms Cipriano said that she had been tortured and assaulted ‘more than once’, but now, during the trial, she stated it that it happened only once. Furthermore, she said she knew the time of the beating - around 8.00pm - because she had looked at the clock in the room where she had been beaten. However, during the trial, she was asked to describe the room and did so without referring to any clock.
There were several major contradictions from Leonor, but one of her sentences has stuck in everyone’s memory. “I don’t remember having made any confession”, she told the court on one occasion.
It is understood that no confession is admissible in court in Portugal unless the defendant repeats it in open court. It is understood that Leonor Cipriano did repeat her confession in her trial for murder in 2005, this making it admissible. So what made her change her mind, over two years later?
Leonor Cipriano originally said she had been beaten up by several PJ inspectors, but when asked to pick them out of a line-up, she could not. She then changed her story to say that the PJ inspectors ‘must have arranged for a person or persons unknown to come into the police station and beat her’.
She then changed her mind again to say she was sure she was beaten by the PJ - but she claims she cannotnow identify them because a bag was placed over her head during the beating. She first of all said it was a blue plastic bag, but soon afterwards she changed this to saying it was ‘green or blue’.
Leonor Cipriano had never previously said that Gonçalo Amaral had personally laid a hand on her - until the court hearing in Faro. Indeed, he had ‘only’ been charged with the Portuguese equivalent of ‘criminal malfeasance’ for the alleged actions of men under his command. Yet, in the Faro court, Leonor Cipriano now changed her story once again and said, yes, Amaral had personally hit her after all. However, there was no evidence given to the court that Gonçalo Amaral was even present when she was being questioned.
In her original statement, Leonor Cipriano said she knew the time the assaults on her took place because there was a clock on the wall in the room in the police station, and that it was approximately from 6.00pm to 8.00pm. Yet three of the named PJ inspectors accused of torturing her were not even in the building at that time; they did not sign into the police station until 8.00 pm on the day in question.
Leonor Cipriano at one point said that she was forced to kneel on broken glass. But there appears to be no record of damage to her knees or legs that would be consistent with such a serious incident.
A major question mark from Leonor Cipriano’s evidence was to explain how anyone, suffering the kind injuries that Leonor Cipriano now claimed she has suffered (namely being beaten about the body, head and face for two hours), did not suffer additional injuries such as cracked ribs or bruises all over her body, cracked, broken, or knocked-out teeth, a split lip, broken or bloody nose, or bruises below the level of her cheekbones?
According to press reports, when asked by the Prison Governor at Odemira Prison to explain her injuries, Leonor Cipriano did not implicate anyone in the police. We must ask then under what circumstances the Prison Director asked her Chief Prison Officer to change the account Ms Cipriano originally provided.
When she was asked in court to give the names of the people she was accusing, Leonor Cipriano had to pull a piece of paper out of her purse to do so. One would think that four years after she claimed to have been tortured, she would have had the time to learn the names of those who she says assaulted her. It begs the question of who wrote that list. Did someone else write it out for her?
A summary of Leonor Cipriano’s 15 lies in Court
Here’s a convenient summary of at least 15 of the lies Leonor Cipriano told in court:
(1) She said that she had seen who had assaulted her, but later she denied this.
(2) During the investigation into her allegation, she said that she had beenassaulted ‘more than once’, but now, during the trial, she stated it that it happened only once.
(3) She said she knew the time of the beating - around 8.00pm - but during the hearing described the room she was supposedly beaten and did so without referring to any clock.
(4) Despite having made a full confession in front of her lawyer and again in her trial for murder in 2005, she told the Faro Court: “I don’t remember having confessed”.
(5) Leonor Cipriano originally said she had been beaten by PJ inspectors, but when asked to pick them out of a line-up, she could not. She then changed her story to say that the PJ inspectors ‘must have arranged for another person or persons unknown to come into the police station and beat her’.
(6) She then changed her mind once again again to say she was beaten by the PJ – claiming she cannot identify them because a bag was placed over her head during the beating.
(7) Ms Cipriano had never previously alleged that Gonçalo Amaral had personally laid a hand on her until the Court hearing in Faro. Yet, in the Faro court, Leonor Cipriano changed her story once again and now said that Gonçalo Amaral personally hit her during the beating.
(8) The photographer who took pictures of Leonor Cipriano’s injuries said he had taken the photographs immediately after the injuries had occurred and that he was there ‘during the afternoon and with daylight’. Yet Ms Cipriano had claimed that the photographs had been taken ‘at night, in a room without light’.
(9) She said that at one point during the beating she was forced to kneel on broken glass. But there was no record of damage to her knees or legs that would be consistent with such a serious incident.
(10) When originally asked by the Prison Governor at Odemira Prison to explain her injuries, Leonor Cipriano did not implicate anyone in the police.
(11) When Ms Cipriano was asked in Court to give the names of the people she was accusing, Leonor Cipriano had to pull a piece of paper out of her purse.
(12) It was clear from the evidence that the beating of Leonor Cipriano took place during the 48 hours after she confessed to murdering her daughter. This is consistent with the reliable reports circulating that Leonor Cipriano was assaulted by fellow prisoners only after they got to learn that she had confessing to her appalling crime.
(13) She denied that she ever had a female lawyer. However, she did have a female lawyer present when she made her original confession.
(14) She said that there was a blue plastic bag over her head, but soon afterwards she changed this to saying it was ‘green or blue’.
(15) She denied that she was visited in prison by her lawyer, Mr Aragão Correia, on 30 October 2008, during the trial. In this respect, she was contradicted by Mr Aragão Correia himself.
1 The McCanns told many family members that the shutters had been forced or broken The shutters had not been forced or broken
2 Gerry McCann first said he entered through the front door, using his key
He later said he entered through the patio door, which had been left unlocked.
3 They claimed the intruder must have entered through the open shutters and open window Later they state that the open shutters and open window may not have been the point of entry or exit
4 They claim the children were not sedated., but admit later that the children must have been sedated
5 Kate told her friends by telephone that she had been made a suspect
Kate later complained that this was press intrusion, when the only possible source was Kate herself
6 The McCanns came up with a range of excuses for bodily fluids found in the car, ranging from sea bass to used nappies.
At Leveson Kate said under oath, there were no fluids found in the car
7 The parents claim to have made half hourly checks throughout the week.
The late Mrs Fenn reports a child crying and screaming for over an hour on a previous evening
8 Kate reported to Insp. Paiva that she had had a dream in which she had “seen” Madeleine dead. He gave this evidence under oath in court.
On the steps of the court Gerry publicly denies that Kate had had any such dream
9 Kate admits lying in the book
10 On 3rd Kate claims to have arrived after a run to find the children with Gerry at tea. On that day Kate herself signed Madeleine out of the crèche at 5:30pm
11 The McCanns released details of the coloboma to the press of the world.
They trademark the sign “Løok”, in the phrase “Løok for me”
The eye defect is blown upon a giant screen at the FA cup Final,
The eye defect is clearly visible on all photos released as part of the campaign
The eye defect is clearly visible on the front cover picture of the book
Later in an interview Kate denies “putting emphasis on it”
12 The McCanns dismissed the idea of using private detectives. In fact the McCanns were already using private detectives from Control Risks the previous week
13 They claim they had no explanation, and that they were made to leave the villa whilst it was searched
In fact there was a full search warrant, a copy of which was to be served on the McCanns. and they were to be invited to be present.
14 Kate claims to have spoken to and sworn at Mrs Fenn. Mrs Fenn's statement refers to speaking to Gerry McCann
15 Metodo3 claims that Madeleine would be found by Christmas
McCanns claimed through their solicitors that this was never said
In the book Kate admits that this was said
16 The pyjama bottoms were white, Later in the book Kate claims the pyjamas were not white. In fact the pyjama trousers were white.
17 They claim the apartment was let several times before it was searched again.
In fact the apartment was not let until February the following year.
18 The McCanns stated that they had cooperated fully with the police and answered all questions truthfully. In fact Kate refused to answer any of the 48 questions during her second interview
- Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06