1.18 The Rise and Fall of Bruno Carvalho - The Court Cases: Last but not least

Let's quickly recap our last post in which we heard the testimony in court of several of the defendants alleged to have carried out the attackers on the players and staff at Alcochete on May the 15th, 2018. In addition we heard from Fernando Mendes, one of the former leaders of the Juve Leo, Sporting's largest and oldest group of Claques. He's firmly sticking to his version of events, that the attacks were nothing to do with him, that it was purely coincidence that he happened to be there at the same time and his only reason for being at the training ground that day was to continue a conversation with the mister Jorge Jesus. 

I think I should give you full disclosure here in as much that the following post is I'd imagine the last one that will be written. But like Sean Connery in his role as James Bond - Never say Never. That's not to say it all finishes here, actually everything else that follows has already been written and just needs a final going over. Google search is now quite frankly one of the most useless tools known to man. There's a chance I could have published the entire testimony section from the courts having missed the evidence of the man at the epicentre of the entire series, one Bruno de Carvalho. Every day during my research I found more reports on pretty much everything but the former club presidents testimony and if I'm being honest I started to wish I hadn't begun this series about ten days ago now but I shall perceiver until the end because frankly I'm as stubborn a man as he is, I'm just not as egotistical. Every time I previously searched for his testimony, all I ever found were the paid for results of big sports sites which confirmed the results of the court hearings, which like everything on Google now is not what I asked it for. Ask it the answer to two plus two and you'll get an advert for homes being sold on a new build. Sorry I just needed a little moan. I knew there was no way they he didn't testify. I just couldn't find it with a poor search engine and my lack of Portuguese. So a big thank you to Chinese AI which got me the results in the end. I wonder if I could have asked me to write the sodding thing in it's entirety? Never mind.

Anyways moan over, as you'll have ascertained I'm sure by what's written above, this is the final post in relation to all the testimony heard by the courts. Admittedly I've missed some testimony out but not many. Some of the technical staff, some of the players, but what I have provided you with should have given you a broad picture. We heard from the GNR officers, Jorge Jesus and some of his team, the players, senior staff at Sporting SAD and even testimony of those who carried out the attacks and the leaders of the Juve Leo who were present on the day. We've looked at it from all points of view but one, Bruno de Carvalho's. It transpires that actually this is also the order you'd have heard it in had you been present in court because he was the very last person to be heard. You could think - well that's typical of him, he thinks he's like a Vanessa Williams song, saving the best to last. Yet we've heard from his lawyer (or lawyers as he changed them a least once that I am aware of) ask the question of why he, de Carvalho, was on trial at all? I don't know for sure but I imagine Cândida Vilar put together the order in which testimony was heard. Which if that is correct, and I've no reason to assume it isn't, the question is why put him last? After all he is one of the three accused of having moral authorship of the attacks along with Jacinto and Mendes. Jacinto in fact gave testimony to the court on the very first session. Personally I don't think they've just used them as a set of bookends. So could it be that the prosecutor, knowing the case against de Carvalho was paper thin to put it politely, was hoping that some evidence or testimony might actually add some plausibility to her case made against him? From nowhere someone will throw her a Hail Mary pass that somehow she holds onto in her dying seconds of the game. Have the GNR finally retrieved the data from André Geraldes' phone and found that one message they could possibly be used to pin the claim of moral authorship onto him?

I am not a fan of the man. Personally I think his running of the club was, if I'm being polite, at times an omnishambles. When I'm not being as polite I'd go with an utter clusterfuck. I don't know why but in Portugal calling people a clown is still very prevalent to this day, but to me that feels a bit 1982. But given this is about a Portuguese man in charge of a Portuguese football club let's say he's a clown. Just because he was our club president doesn't mean I can defend his behaviour because in the here and now you'll have Porto fans defending their current club president André Villas-Boas and I think he is every bit as bad as Bruno de Carvalho was, maybe even worse. They're both fantasists who think the world is against them. Everything has a form of conspiracy attached to it and none of the behaviour that we ourselves might find to be completely unjustifiable even registers on any level within their own conscience. They don't have a moral compass and can rarely see past the end of their own noses. But… with all that taken into consideration, I will concede that by now turning back to the trials that even I've been left asking that exact same question? Why is Bruno de Carvalho sat on trial? Being a massive bellend isn't in itself a criminal offence.

To quickly recap the trial began on November 18th. After a break of nearly two weeks the court is entering the closing arguments phase (That will have pleased de Carvalho even more I imagine.) Between the requests from the prosecution and the defence combined, the testimony of 155 witnesses (65 for the prosecution and 90 for the defence) will have been heard over 35 sessions. Of the 44 defendants in the case 22 provided statements to the court including Jacinto, Mendes and de Carvalho accused of being the masterminds behind 40 counts of aggravated threats, 19 counts of aggravated assault, and 38 counts of kidnapping. It's important to stress that these 97 crimes combined are classified under Portuguese law as terrorism. They are punishable by imprisonment from a term of two to ten years or by the corresponding penalties for each crime, increased by one-third in their minimum and maximum limits, if these are equal to or greater than the minimum and maximum limits. Sorry I didn't tell you to bring your calculator did I?

I think the nice thing here is even if you followed everything when it was happening way back then, after so many years you're not really going to remember all the finer details but in this format it does allow you to make a judgement prior to reading his testimony of how you think he'll deliver it. So I'd like you all to stop and consider first how you think Mr Bruno de Carvalho will behave it court? Do you think he'll act with dignity, as a custodian of the once fine name and reputation of Sporting CP that has been sullied and trodden on and needs carefully rebuilding and not made any worse? Do you think he'll be accepting of the courts findings, act in a manner where he won't try dispense blame on pretty much everyone of the prosecutions witnesses? Will he choose to eat possibly the merest slice of humble pie? Or will he act like a moany ball bag? Right now I don't know the answer because I've not yet read his testimony. But you know that if I'm a betting man exactly where I'm putting my money on and it isn't on him leaving having restored the tarnished reputation of one of Portugal's largest, finest and oldest sporting institutions. Let's all find out together. Come on, take a hand, left or right it doesn't matter, this is going to be a jolly fun adventure I'm sure, absolutely nothing to worry about. No fires to put out. Nothing to see. We won't need to know where our nearest emergency exists are, it'll all be fine.

I feel like we need to borrow a voice from one of the old American news reporters to read this over some orchestral piece of music with the sound of an old typewriter clacks thrown in for good measure at the start. Again, this isn't a podcast so use your imagination.

‘Bruno de Carvalho was the 22nd and final defendant to testify, after Eduardo Nicodemes, Ricardo Neves, and Fernando Mendes were heard during today's session.’

Note - Oh well I'm sure he'll have been in a sterling mood if he's had to follow on from the testimony of the former Juve Leo leader Fernando Mendes. You'll forgive me for paraphrasing what his testimony was but it might help if you imagine what follows is said in a Cockney accent when I say the short version goes - it was nothing to do with me guv, it was just a pure coincidence I was there on the same day me ‘ol China. See what ‘appened at the airport in Madeira like was I said to me ol’ mucker Gorgeous Jorge that I'll be paying you a visit. I had some errands to run for me ol’ Gran on the 15th and one of the lads went d’you wanna lift?’ and I went yeah blinding, triffic and off we went. Me and him, well we're both big Sporting fans and I went, I know Gorgeous Jorge, why don't we stop off at Alcochete and we'll both say ‘allo? He normally brings me some sticky buns and a nice mug of Rosie. Anyways we get there and fuck me there's abaht 50 geezers with their boats covered which was a bit odd but I said, well we're ‘ere now so seems silly to turn back. I said to Pedro on the gates, hello Pedro me old fruit but he didn't see me cause he was chasing after the geezers. I thought they won't mind me going in, they know who I am, them geezers weren't anything to do with me. Anyways, long story short like, Gorgeous Jorge comes up to me and he's got the right ol' bleeding hump. Someone's only given the ol' bastard a clout. He claimed it was all to do wiv me and I went oi Gorgeous Jorge, I like you, but NO you utta melt. You're taking fuckin’ liberties there my son. I'm only ‘ere to talk to you. This ain't nuffink to do with me. Well in the end we went home and had to make our own Rosie and we were out of buns but I found us some Jaffa cakes and they went down a treat. Oh at some point I gave my old mate Bruno a call. I was fucking leathered and I don't remember what I said. Sorry about that bruv. I hope it wasn't a booty call.

So there you have the synopsis of what Fernandes told the court. Follow that if you can Mr Bruno de Carvalho.

It should also be noted that on the same day that the former president of Sporting was heard, that being February the 28th, the court also decided to lift the pre-trial detention order imposed on Nuno Mendes who had been remanded since May 2019 on charges of drug trafficking. I've stated in one of the very earliest posts about the testimony that it felt like Cândida Vilar's prosecution case had just blown away like a house of cards. Of course Mendes release didn't mean that he wouldn't be possibly found guilty of being a mastermind alongside Jacinto and de Carvalho, but throughout the trial the only thing that actually links two of them is the assumptions made by the prosecution and by the GNR. Jacinto we know at least had conversations with Tiago Silva on the day of the attacks and made his way to Alcochete but that's tenuous at least when considering the weight of charges being laid at his door.

So on the 35th session de Carvalho was heard by the Monsanto court.

De Carvalho stated that he had "no knowledge whatsoever" of the attacks at Alcochete until he was informed during a meeting. "What happened in Alcochete was shameful. What people went through was regrettable and indescribable."

Note - That is genuinely the first reference I have found to the man actually confirming what happened was as he says "shameful."

Shining the light back on himself to the court, de Carvalho said: "They put me on the wrong side of the barricade when they decided to change me from witness to defendant number 44." He added "Almost two years after the event, I don't understand how I am here as a defendant.”

He again states that what happened was: "a heinous and shameful crime," yet again assuring to all present that he had "no knowledge or suspicion" that the invasion and subsequent attacks would happen.

Talking in regards to the final game in Madeira, which he didn't personally attend, he confirms that he watched the scenes that happened after the 2-1 defeat "on television" and also added that he got the impression that there was a problem in Juve Leo between Fernando Mendes and Nuno Mendes.

Note - It would be interesting to know on what basis de Carvalho made that last statement and was it born from witnessing something first hand or because of what either man may have told him personally in private? Because when you consider that one single statement he's just made, you can go back and conclude as to why Nuno Mendes was not in the WhatsApp Groups. Bruno de Carvalho didn't travel to Madeira whereas Nuno Mendes did, however he chose not to attend the game, instead he watched it in a cafe and then travelled back to Lisboa the next day. So let's assume that the former president is correct and there's a rift. The GNR assumed that Nuno Mendes must have had something to do with the planning and carrying out of the attacks. Yet there had been no evidence to support this theory, and here on the very last day, a man with a key unlocks a new door and lays out as to why most likely that was. So a man has sat in prison on charges of drug trafficking without evidence that the drugs found at Casinha were his, whereas de Carvalho had the benefit of being free on bail. For all Mendes perceived faults, and like all of us I'm sure he's got a few, we've heard testimony that suggests that not only would he have been the type of person not to have planned it, but also that had he been there he'd have also been the type of person to have stopped it from happening. What de Carvalho is doing is also hinting towards the falling out of the two Mendes’ at the time the attacks occurred. Pure coincidence? Was that the truth? Was the wrong Mendes named as one of the three co-conspirators? If it was anyone should it have been Fernando Mendes and if so, again should de Carvalho been one of those three? Nothing has suggested the answer to that question should be yes.

Discussing the meeting that took place between the players and himself on May the 14th, De Carvalho states that he asked both Acuña and Battaglia "why they immediately confronted the former leader of the supporters' group at Madeira airport?"

He further claims that William is "a habitual liar," and that the former player had accused him of being responsible for the attack. "As soon as I arrived at the academy, William told me: 'You think we don't know that you ordered this to be done?'"

Note - I will at this juncture point out that particular claim runs contradictory to all the testimony provided previously where it was confirmed on several occasions that all of the players had chosen not to talk to the then club president when he arrived at Alcochete after the attacks.

De Carvalho states that at the request of André Geraldes he attended a meeting "that went nowhere," at Casinha on April the 7th, 2018. "There were dozens of people, all shouting, many smoking joints, they wanted to attack me, the first one who wanted to attack me was Camará, who is the 'smallest' of them all. They even said they were going to put up banners against me." He adds that he said "do what you want" because actually what he wanted by that stage "was to get out of there."

Note - Again this runs contradictory to other testimony previously heard where it's claimed that de Carvalho is the one who stated that he wanted to be present at the meeting. After he was compared to Donald Trump all those years ago in a British newspaper article, all these years later in 2026 his words even have the same type of ring to them as the language the current US president uses where he is deliberately baiting someone by picking on part of their characteristics - "Camará, who is the 'smallest' of them all." Absolutely no need for it. Maybe he will call someone out for having a low IQ before the day is out?

On his relationship with the two Mendes, de Carvalho admitted that he and Fernando didn't like each other. Yet with Nuno "we managed to build a relationship of respect, but the truth is that I ended up liking Nuno Mendes because he's so genuine, he makes us laugh. He always respected me and I respected him. He was always more of a solution than a problem." He dismisses the idea that the Nuno Mendes was "a kind of praetorian guard."

Note - I heard that all being read in Donald Trump's voice which is one part apt and one equal measure worrying. I think the journalist Jack Pitt-Brooke was spot on with his comparison the more I think about it. It's always someone else’s fault and both men are quick the point the finger of blame.

Testifying to the courts in relation to the former coach Jorge Jesus, de Carvalho would claim that "None of this would have happened if the security measures I had implemented had not been removed."

Note - I am Jack's total lack of surprise (one for Fight Club fans there). No sooner had I accused him of pointing the finger of blame he's right at it.

De Carvalho claims that Ricardo Gonçalves, head of security at the time of the invasion had informed him that Jesus at the beginning of that season had ordered the removal, and without his knowledge, of some security measures that had been implemented, such as the electronic gate access card.

Note - Handy when you go last and the likes of Jesus and Gonçalves cannot refute those claims. I find it very difficult to believe that your head of security would remove something like that without having run it up the chain of command. Whether it hit de Carvalho’s desk is another matter but you know what I'm getting at.

De Carvalho stressed that he had "always been against" fans going to Alcochete. According to him this was only possible because of the precedent set by Jesus: "The big problem was, in December 2017, after I said no, Mr. Jorge Jesus said yes, behind my back, and allowed the fan groups to enter the academy. The problem is that it's the first time, and it happened once during my term, without my knowledge." De Carvalho claims that upon finding out he then called Jesus and told him that "the next time" he undermined him "he would be fired."

Note - Again no one here to contradict his testimony again. Here I am Mr Whiter than White. Me? A former member of two Sporting Claques, of course I would be against fans going to visit the training ground. Testimony that it happened every season to wish the players luck for the season ahead? ‘Never on my watch. Definitely forget the part about the said about the bond I formed with Mr Nuno Mendes and how we enjoyed a good joke together.’ I can't stop hearing it all being said in Trumps voice now. Rui Patrício in his testimony confirmed it was commonplace but usually only before the first game of the season.

De Carvalho asserts that he was not responsible for changing the training time on the day of the attacks. He attributes that decision to Jesus at their meeting the previous day. "I neither suggested it, nor did I have to suggest it. It's a complete fabrication. He, speaking with Raul José, explained that he might receive a 'little note' stating that he was suspended. I replied that I would meet with the legal team in the morning, but that this didn't mean there would be a note. What he understood was that they would prepare the note in the morning, so he moved the training to the afternoon."

De Carvalho claims the existence of unease between the players and the mister Jesus: "In the meeting on May 14th I wanted to tell the players that Jorge Jesus was no longer going to be the coach and I even wanted to say more: 'I know you're all going to have a celebratory dinner'."

Note - At no point has there been any suggestion of the merest disharmony between the players and Jesus ever having been reported. That isn't to say that it isn't true, only that de Carvalho is the only one who is saying it and he knows full well that if anyone refutes these claims that he is making now, it will be to the media and after the horse has bolted and not to the courts.

De Carvalho bemoans at the end of his testimony that he was "the only one fired in the midst of all this." He admitted that on May 14th he wanted to fire two people: "One ended up being decorated and the other is now president." That a reference to Jesus and Frederico Varandas the former club doctor at the time of the attack.

He ends contesting the accusation of being the mastermind behind the 97 crimes, formulated by the Public Prosecutor's Office: "All of these people worked at the Academy. A possible theory that I gathered these people together to be assaulted doesn't make sense. I didn't attract anyone who didn't work at the Academy. I didn't do anything wrong."

Miguel Fonseca, the lawyer for Bruno de Carvalho in his closing statements to the court stated that the "existence of moral authors" in the case of the invasion of the Sporting academy in Alcochete "is a legal abortion," which began to be undone today. “This is a farce that was staged, the existence of masterminds in this process is a farce imposed under pressure."

In relation to the release of Nuno Mendes Fonseca states: "It was the undoing of a legal aberration that was created with that citizen and that has been undone today; this man should not have been deprived of his freedom for a single hour."

Speaking in direct links to the attacks he accepts there were "physical perpetrators, because the players were assaulted and should not have been," but he criticised the existence of alleged moral perpetrators, one of whom is of course his client. Not mincing his words he went on to say “Going after authors is a sign of mental illness, we are in the realm of delusion, whoever sought moral authors committed a legal abortion,” he said, adding: “With the release of this man, part of a farce falls apart,” once again alluding to the release of Nuno Mendes.

Note - I have no idea whether abortion is the right word there by the way. As always I am reliant on the translation so if it is not correct, I can confirm this was not the word that I chose, but merely that was the translation provided.

He assured that his client had now "clarified everything that the court wanted clarified,” adding "As his lawyer, I gave him carte blanche to speak, because one of the few shameful things that has happened so far is that they destroyed this man's life without ever posing a concrete question to him."

Note - The lawyer says he gave him carte blanche. I think it is safe to suggest that even if he had told him not to talk in regards to certain matters, that de Carvalho would have chosen to ignore him and do it his own way. Here is a man that from the outside looking in is always convinced that he is the one that knows best.

The trial continues on March the 11th with closing arguments, the day on which all defendants are required to appear in court for possible sentencing.

Some of the gems of nuggets to part from the lips of de Carvalho during his testimony according to the Portuguese press included;

"If convicted, I'm the most idiotic criminal in the world."

A revelation that - "When William Carvalho went out at night and got into trouble, which was common, who did they call? Members of the claques."

He claims that Jorge Jesus "ended up destroying Sporting, the people, the president and his family."

"I have a theory about pressure cookers. Sometimes you just need to remove the pressure valve to deflate them."

"I'm the most idiotic terrorist mastermind in the world, because they wanted to beat me up."

"Two casuals sat here as witnesses: Pedro Silveira ['Barbini'] and Gonçalo Amaral. Prosecutor Cândida Vilar says that 'casuals' are the worst thing in the world. They were here as witnesses and I am here as a defendant."

There may be better reference points and sources than what I found and used but as I've admitted already I'd found these right at the end of my research. I've made a mental note to stop researching because it turns out with the word count I've written a novel that I've given away for free. That’s nice of me isn't it? So if someone says you never read books you can tell them actually I read the Rise and Fall of Bruno de Carvalho, fuck you very much. I do have to wonder though if certain editors didn’t want to give the man a platform within their publications though that being said controversy sells.

In the end nothing he said there surprised me. It was at least nice to read that he condemned the attacks but he was still more concerned at portraying himself as the real victim at the end of it all. He had to get as many cheap shots in as possible whilst he could. He took full advantage of those he blamed not being able to have any come back on the day. To summarise - it was all the fault of Jorge Jesus. I'm sure that will have come as surprising news and somewhat of a shock to the old mister. Jesus got Gonçalves to remove the security implementations that de Carvalho has made without him knowing. Did the president never make a point of going to watch the B team play there or the younger when groups? Surely you'd have noticed then and gone ‘where did the barriers go Ricardo?’ Sure Jesus might have well requested it but presumably you're talking a few quids worth of kit. Then he claims that he didn't change the changing times. Which might again be true. But the reason being the mister was waiting to be fired that morning so probably assumed it was easier that if that happened that actually he hasn't wasted his morning. Truthfully the entire court proceedings have felt like one massive shit sandwich and Bruno de Carvalho was just the finishing touch with his woe is me, it's not my fault, blame him, him and definitely him but definitely under any circumstances - me!

So join us in our next part when we hear the decision of Judge Pires. Will Bruno de Carvalho, Nuno Mendes and Bruno Jacinto be found proven to have been the masterminds behind the attack? What will be the fate of the other defendants? Find out when you join us next time.