More propaganda from the Generalissima (merged)

More has appeared:

http://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/blind-justice-maddie-case-review-is.html#comment-form

I am delighted to see that Fruitloop Flores seems to be having an attack of the Rattled Cages:

AMF: Moita Flores is looking a slightly annoyed.

Francisco Moita Flores [FMF]: Because what he says...

AMP: Moita Flores has a tendency 3 to corporatism.

FMF: No, not all. If they were Portuguese parents, just like a case that happened last week...

AMP: Are the English parents any different?

FMF: No, it is you who is making that distinction.

Rui Rangel [RR]: The manner in which you're placing that problem makes that distinction. As if because they are an English couple that wouldn't be feasible.

AMP: How?

FMF: The way in which you are formulating the problem is making a distinction.

AMP: No, no... English or French... They come to Portugal to spent their holidays....

RR: But that is not the issue.

AMP: What I was trying to say...

RR: What you said wasn't clear.

AMP: All right then, they're in Portugal spending their holidays...

FMF: In fact, that possibility of parents coming to Portugal to murder their child was never placed.

AMP: Was never placed. They either came in here to murder her during their holidays....

AMF: But the accidental death hypothesis was placed.

AMP: Of an accident, and the first thing before an accident is to hide the cadaver?! For God's sake they don't even know if the child is dead or not. The first thing when a parent sees an accident, is to take her to an hospital...

FMF: His argumentation made some furore at the time. [speaking to the rest of the panel]

AMP: Hu?

FMF: Your argumentation made some furore at the time.

AMP: No, no, no. This argumentation is a common sense thing.

AMF: Why did it made furore?

AMP: Wait. [speaking to AMF] Allow me to conclude what I have to say about this issue. So, it's an absurd. To attribute... in a previous case, also in the Algarve, with Joana [Cipriano] and her mother, because the mother is in jail... and that worked there because it was a person who didn't have a true defense4...

FMF: Because she was Portuguese. [sarcastic reply]


AMP:...nor media, it was a person who belonged to a low social stratum...

Notes

1 Portuguese idiomatic expression: “Só para inglês ver”, meaning “a mendacity for the sake of appearances”, literally translated as “for the English to see”; originated in the 19th century.
2 Latin ex novo translates as from new/from scratch
3 Portuguese idiomatic expression: “Puxa-lhe o pé para o chinelo”, meaning “someone has a tendency to defend something due to corporatism”, literal translation “Pulls his foot to the slipper”.
4 Read bellow extract from the Supreme Court of Justice ruling, translated in full in this blog. And also Cipriano Case: Without a Trace of Joana - Updated Video

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

The Morais version of the Cipriano case follows.

But what is this, you may ask.


AMP: Wait. [speaking to AMF] Allow me to conclude what I have to say about this issue. So, it's an absurd. To attribute... in a previous case, also in the Algarve, with Joana [Cipriano] and her mother, because the mother is in jail... and that worked there because it was a person who didn't have a true defense4...

FMF: Because she was Portuguese. [sarcastic reply]


Is it me, or is Flores dangerously close to saying that Leonor Cipriano was framed?

Read it twice Bonny, and I am getting the same impression as you are.

Thanks, Tony, that's what I thought.

IMO, Team Gonc are in far more trouble than we know of at present, and cracks in their ranks are starting to show.

I can see a tidal wave of scandal heading in the general direction of FARO.

Here comes another rattled cage:

Fernis said... 38
Marinho Pinto simply doesn't know what he is talking about. He is a man who has the habit of opening his mouth at any opportunity, has an opinion on everything and, as a rule, speaks nonsense, bull! He should be ignored. Media gives him too much attention and the guy feels he is important. Well, he is not. And as to Maddie's case he absolutely knows nothing as can be seen by his words. Of course, his presence in the program draws viewers because of his often unrully and odd behaviour. In my opinion this is the only reason he is there, apart for his dislike of Goncalo Amaral. He likes attention and we souldn't give it to him.

Bit hard to ignore, though, isn't he? Senhor Pinto knows EXACTLY what he is talking about, and that is why Gonc and the Team are running scared.

Oh, and actually, he is important. Very important.

Tick tock and all that.

bb1 wrote:Thanks, Tony, that's what I thought.

IMO, Team Gonc are in far more trouble than we know of at present, and cracks in their ranks are starting to show.

I can see a tidal wave of scandal heading in the general direction of FARO.

I hope Marcos has seen the same interview.
Francisco Moita Flores has stated, Leonor Cipriano is in prison not because she is guilty; but because she is Portuguese.

I am sure Senhor Pinto will make sure Marcos is informed, Tony.

I wonder how Flores is going to talk his way out of that bombshell - I gather there is still more to come.

It seems unmistakeable - Flores said that Leonor Cipriano is only in jail because she is Portuguese, following Pinto remarking that she didn't have proper representation.

I hope Marcos has seen the same interview.
Francisco Moita Flores has stated, Leonor Cipriano is in prison not because she is guilty; but because she is Portuguese.

Yes, Tony.

I am not sure. Question Marks are being left out. And I can't see Flores defending Leonor Cipriano. There seems to be a lot of sarcasm in there. But it is good that the case of Joana Cipriano is being brought up yet again. Someone is not happy about it. Not sure who.

I don't think for one minute Flores is defending her, Sabot - IMO, he made what he thought was a smart remark, and said more than he intended to.

bb1 wrote:I don't think for one minute Flores is defending her, Sabot - IMO, he made what he thought was a smart remark, and said more than he intended to.

I agree Bonny. In my opinion, Marcos should be made aware of it. Had Flores added because she is guilty and Portuguese not English; he could have got away with it as sarcasm.
He didn't, so it stands as it reads.

bb1 wrote:I don't think for one minute Flores is defending her, Sabot - IMO, he made what he thought was a smart remark, and said more than he intended to.

So it was sarcasm. What he meant was that The World wrongly concluded that she had been wrongly convicted because she was Portuguese, and a bit thick. When in fact this is precisely what happened. And isn't he the one who advocated Beatings to get Confessions?

If he ever admits that Leonor Cipriano could have been stitched up then he will have admitted that the same thing happened to The McCanns. And he ain't going to admit that. Ever.

It's interesting, though, that the Gonc squad get rattled by the slightest criticism or dissent.

bb1 wrote:It's interesting, though, that the Gonc squad get rattled by the slightest criticism or dissent.

While we all fall about laughing and put the boot in.

I think we might be winning at long last. Tick Bloody Tock.

In my opinion, Flores , should not have been so flippant.
Did Leonor have the cr@p beaten out of her because she was Portuguese?
And then found guilty because she was Portuguese?
Did the McCanns escape the same punishment because they were English?

That one statement by Flores can be taken in so many ways and I suggest Morais makes it clear exactly what is meant.

Oh my....

AMP: Wait. [speaking to AMF] Allow me to conclude what I have to say about this issue. So, it's an absurd. To attribute... in a previous case, also in the Algarve, with Joana [Cipriano] and her mother, because the mother is in jail... and that worked there because it was a person who didn't have a true defense4...

FMF: Because she was Portuguese. [sarcastic reply]

AMP:...has the Maddie had [not sure if he means Maddie or media], it was a person who belonged to a low social stratum...

AMF: However it was proven that she did indeed murder her own child.

AMP: No, it wasn't proven. She confessed under torture that she had murdered her child. But she never confessed where she hid the body, the cadaver was never found. The only thing they had was her confession. [Again look at Note 4 which clearly contradicts this statement] No one can say that lady is innocent or guilty, nor I can say that.

RR: He already said it.

AMP: What I can affirm is that in the process there isn't enough evidence to put her in jail. And in Portugal...

AMF: There are circumstantial evidence...

AMP: Precisely....

AMF: Last week we talking about that here, in the non-existance of a cadaver, where convictions can still be achieved.

AMP: Corpus delicti [body of crime]...

RR: It's not a decisive factor, obviously.

AMP: If there was presumption of innocence5 she wouldn't be in jail.

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

According to Morais, 5 -


5“Todo o arguido se presume inocente até ao trânsito em julgado da sentença de condenação.” in Art. 32.º -2, Constitição da Répública Portuguesa. Translation: “Every arguido is presumed innocent until the judgement of the sentence for condemnation is res judicata [becomes final]”. in Article 32, - 2, Constitution of the Portuguese Republic.

THEN WHY DO TEAM GONC ALWAYS NEED SMEAR CAMPAIGNS AND INTIMIDATION?

Morais has translated more - and the forkers are not going to like it one bit:

http://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/blind-justice-maddie-case-review-is.html

AMP: If there was presumption of innocence5 she wouldn't be in jail, regardless of being or not guilty of that fact. With those [McCann couple] they've tried the same thing, but it didn't work. It's, it's...This comes from a judicial culture, that is not exclusive to police but also of magistrates, of a headlong rush forward before the impossibility of finding a guilty person of crimes that are highly mediatic. They have to find someone guilty.*** [Inner note: If that was the case they would have gone for Robert Murat aka the “scape-goat”]*** They have to find someone. And that sometimes causes the worst injustices.

RR: But that is the denial of what you're saying. In the Maddie case they never found anyone.

AMP: They've tried to find someone, they tried to find the parents...

FMF: It wasn't like that, that's not true at all. Here the situation was different.

AMP:...of the child.

FMF: Marinho, it wasn't like that. I accompanied this case from the first minute.

AMF: How did it happen then?

FMF: What took place here was something very different.

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

And what was Fruitloop Flores doing being in any way involved with the McCann case? He's a Masonic Mayor and Talking Head who occasionally babbles in CdM.

***Yet again, Morais is putting her own 'interpretation' in the middle of straight news stories***

Just a reminder of what Flores thinks is the correct way to for the Portuguese police to treat the mothers of missing children:

MF – Things were different in my time. She would have been under such an attack that before she realised anything, she'd be in jail.

Bet he was heartbroken when Salazar died

FMF: Marinho, it wasn't like that. I accompanied this case from the first minute
Okay, what does he mean by, "I accompanied this case"?
Does he mean he followed it or he was actually on the job?

A very good question, Tony, because Flores should know NOTHING about it that is not public domain - but does anyone else think his good friend Gonc has been running his mouth off to his cronies all along?

bb1 wrote:A very good question, Tony, because Flores should know NOTHING about it that is not public domain - but does anyone else think his good friend Gonc has been running his mouth off to his cronies all along?

He accompanied the case from the first minute, which would mean he was called the night Madeleine disappeared?

They probably cooked it up together.

I think the pot is now boiling over....

crazytony wrote:

bb1 wrote:A very good question, Tony, because Flores should know NOTHING about it that is not public domain - but does anyone else think his good friend Gonc has been running his mouth off to his cronies all along?

He accompanied the case from the first minute, which would mean he was called the night Madeleine disappeared?

Why would he know the first minute, Tony?.
Unless????????????????????????

bb1 wrote:I think the pot is now boiling over....

Oh it sure as hell is, Bonny