Author(s) Patrícia Daniela Coelho Madeira
Advisor(s) Maria Clara Calheiros
Year 2015

Synopsis This professional activity report is made in the course of the course of study leading to the degree of Master under the “Masters in Judiciary Law – Procedural Law and Judicial Organization”, at the Law School of the University of Minho, according to the provisions of paragraph 3 of Order RT-38/2011, of June 21st. The accreditation of the training acquired in the corresponding Graduate course had already been provided, has exempted us from the scholar part of the Masters course. Therefore, the report starts with a description of the academic and professional training of its author, followed by a detailed description of its professional activity, including its duration, the locations where it was and is currently exercised, mentioning the orders and decisions rendered, and even made a reference to the level of performance achieved, based on reports on inspections of the term to which i was subjected. Then follows the approach to the topic chosen, starting this brief analysis of the evidence referred to in the Portuguese criminal procedural law as well as the indication of some guiding principles of evaluation of the evidence and the reasons for the decision, by passing if after the analysis of indirect testimony, and specifically, the possibility of it when valuation, and its source the very defendant in thirst for audience discussion and trial, this same defendant is referred to silence. In this perspective, and given the current and legal significance of the issue, taking into account the evidence admissible in Portuguese criminal proceedings, the principle of free assessment of evidence and its limits and restrictions, the principle of presumption of innocence and the fundamental right to silence given to the defendant, in addition to indicating the positions of doctrine and national jurisprudence, analyze It will also briefly a judgment given by the signatory, as part of their profession, to the application and analysis of this evidence, which factors result in his personal position on this issue.

See more here.