2.13 The Story of Alcochete: Hoodwinked

Usually I'd start with a recap of the last post but in this instance it's been three months or more since I wrote it and it's not going to be of use in this final part of the series. Because like the Labour government I'm about to do a massive U-turn. With space from my reporting of what happened at Alcochete, the Sporting CP training complex on May 18th, 2018 it's allowed me to re-evaluate everything I thought I had understood. Then the penny dropped that if my belief that certain things were true, then when I looked at everything else in that light, pretty much everything else I'd written and theorised upon had been going in the wrong direction. This doesn't mean to say that what you're about to read is correct, it's just my reading of the attacks, why they happened and what I think the truth is. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. 

It's possible for more than one thing to be true. Sometimes truth is subjective, one man's truth is another man's lie. If something is factual does that mean it's indisputable? No it doesn't because the latter has a higher bar than the first to meet. Facts can be presented contextually and framed to fit your own narrative at any rate. You can always make something sound better or worse depending on your end goal. If I said to you that 1 in every 10 women in the US was at risk of breast cancer in their lifetime that may appear at first hearing to be worrying. Firstly it's a risk not a guarantee of getting breast cancer. Secondly if you frame it the other way, 90% of women in America won't be at risk of getting breast cancer. Exactly the same statistic framed in two different ways. So who's delivering the message is maybe one of the most critical parts. As you're reading this, I'm clearly the one driving the narrative and the question at hand is the attacks of the Sporting CP training complex on May 18th, 2018. It's been a couple of months since the second series went live with me trying to get to the bottom of what happened. The truth is only those who were involved will ever really know and even then it'll be their version of the truth. So anything I write is not a definitive answer. But that doesn't stop me from trying to get to the bottom of things and I can't help but keep coming back to different parts of the story. I'm quite literally in this case returning to the scene of the crime albeit metaphorically. I've not flown over with a deer stalker hat and magnifying glass. 

It had never dawned on me until very recently how Bruno de Carvalho’s failure to condemn the attacks when he was still the club president of Sporting CP could have been perceived by the prosecution and if so was this one of the reasons they went after him as one of the masterminds despite an overwhelming lack of any evidence?

The more I've considered it the more it becomes a distinct possibility because the prosecution gets the entire case wrong from start to finish and therefore anything becomes a possibility. Over the years a spiders web of narratives has been spun which is really hard not to get stuck in. 

I am of the considered opinion that there was no planned attack. If that's true then there cannot be any masterminds behind the attack. If both those points are true then the trials were a massive waste of resources, time and money. 

We know that the visit however was planned. We know it was unauthorised. However could it be claimed that Bruno de Carvalho given his failure to condemn the attacks that transpired knew about the visit in advance and if yes is there anything corroborate this? Why doesn't he ever condemn the attacks in turn?

It turns out there probably is cause to believe he knew about the visit. That doesn't make it true of course but let's lay a possible argument out. In the meeting that took place at the Juve Leo Casinha in April a month before the attacks, Vasco Santos confirmed the claques had made noises about going to Alcochete but assumed as he'd heard no further about it that the plan had been shelved. That seems fair enough. However after the defeat to Marítimo we know things got heated between the fans in attendance and the players after the final whistle. This them escalated at the airport in Funchal, Madeira when Marcus Acuña, Rodrigo Battaglia, Fernando Mendes and Tiago Silva are involved in a confrontation. We know Bruno de Carvalho didn't travel to Madeira so didn't witness it first hand. This all took place just a couple of days before the attack. Fernando Mendes makes it very clear he's going to see them at Alcochete. The clubs security staff are there at the airport so they're aware of it. That doesn't mean to say it would actually happen, it's purely circumstantial however even if bluster you'd have to assume the information is related from Vasco Santos to Bruno de Carvalho direct or at least through André Geraldes and then passed upwards. Maybe no one passed it on? Could be true. It did however go out on the news in Portugal and was widely reported. Fernando Mendes and Bruno de Carvalho both admit to speaking on the phone that night and we know partially what's said because de Carvalho tells the players at a meeting that he had fans calling him non stop asking for Marcus Acuña’s home address. Whether there was more than one fan I can't say for certain but it's not a stretch to say that Fernando Mendes was definitely one of those people. So now you have two credible threats, one at the airport and one direct to the club president so along with having been at the meeting in April at the Juve Leo he's fully aware that a visit is a real possibility. We'll never know what was said between the pair on the phone. Yet could it be true that Fernando Mendes told him that a group of fans would be paying a visit to training that week? It's entirely plausible. Not to attack the players and coaching staff, but to remonstrate with their perceived lack of effort and that de Carvalho may have considered it a good idea? I don't think it's that far fetched a notion to say it could be true. It could also be a contributing factor as to why he doesn't condemn them. Because had he done publicly then Fernando Mendes would have retaliated by claiming whilst he didn't authorise an official visit he wasn't adverse to them putting the wind up his players and coaching staff. 

We know from the testimony of a huge number of defendants that they thought they were going to Alcochete to voice their displeasure. They expected the players to be on the training pitch when they arrived. They didn't go in armed with weapons which strengthens the argument it wasn't a pre-planned attack. They run because they're afraid they're about to miss training altogether and their faces are covered because there are TV crews stationed outside the training complex - the Taça de Portugal is coming up on Sunday. 

Now could it be true that Bruno de Carvalho was aware and turns a blind eye and that the visit was orchestrated by Fernando Mendes and whilst they disguised part of the purpose of the visit at some point between the Monday and the Friday they should have been expected? Either some people were incredibly naive in the chain of command or ultimately complicit. Why is Vasco Santos made a scapegoat but Ricardo Gonçalves kept his job? 

Let's say Fernando Mendes is aware that Válter Semedo has been getting far too involved with the football casuals. We know he's super pissed with Marcus Acuña because of a perceived slight at his late mother and at the same time Tiago Silva is super pissed at Rodrigo Battaglia. Hypothetically it's Mendes who gets them both to set up face book groups, one or all of the three agree to use Nuno Mendes’ name to draw fans there to act as a distraction. They'll take along a few known faces who they'll use to pull Acuña, Battaglia, Patrício and William aside, put the fear or God into them in the ultimate show of fan power but at some point their plan goes out the window and gets hijacked by the football casuals who take matters into their own hands. 

Had the players been out on the training field you'd not have had a group of men trying to chase a group of finally tuned athletes over the field. Even Sebastián Coates would have hot footed it away and he pulls an invisible caravan whenever he runs. You've one group that runs to the complex thinking they're going to stand and shout at players with their faces covered on the side of the training pitch. Then Fernando Mendes and Tiago Silva are amongst those who have entered with nothing covering their faces. It's a power play. We represent the Juve Leo, Sporting CP’s largest and oldest claques and we do not need your permission to walk onto club property and demand to see the players and have our displeasure known. If things don't improve on the pitch there will be consequences. Had the players and coaches been on the training pitch I don't think it goes south. I think there may be some heated exchanges between four or five of the Juve Leo with the four players mentioned plus Jorge Jesus in the same room but that would have been it. Close on 40 men shouting and holding flares who'd have dispersed having made their point. Job done. They'd have been unaware they were a smokescreen for the talk between members of the Juve Leo and players and staff but that wouldn't have been overly important. The Juve Leo hierarchy save face and get an apology, no one gets hurt and they all move on. 

So why does it go south? Well the one set of defendants we never hear from are the football casuals so we'll never really know. I don't think it's a stretch to say they simply acted as a way to enhance their own burgeoning reputation. Call it one upmanship and a retaliation against Nuno Mendes and the Juve Leo. We know in Nuno Mendes’ testimony they he describes how he tried to keep those types of elements from the stands and ensure they weren't associated with either the Juve Leo or the club. He also talks of a racist element to the group which one assumes he'd experienced first hand. Given his nickname is Mustafá, whilst I can't say for certain, given his appearance he's of mixed race heritage which makes me suspect he was a target or that appalling type of abuse. The plan switches, a few idiots try make a name for themselves, Acuña and Battaglia take a few slaps, William and Patrício take some verbal abuse and it all gets out of hand. Some people simply get carried along in the moment which is a long established psychological trait. Then as quickly as it happens it starts to stop when people come to their senses, state it wasn't supposed to happen like this and try to leg it. Because that's the other thing if it is a planned attack, how come there's no planned exit? All you get is the blue BMW driven onto the complex which for me is another show of power. We've manipulated your staff to allow this to happen. That person being Bruno Jacinto the club liaison officer. There's no point have I ever thought he might be the puppet master pulling every string. Now that would be quite the story.

If you look at the limited photos and footage taken at the time it's equally a case of what don't you see as much as what do you see? Why do only some of the players make a big deal of it in court with claims they thought their lives were in danger whilst others are more sanguine and calm? 

It's called a state of fight or flight for a reason. Fear comes from learned experiences but also fears passed on by our friends and family. We're not born fearful of things like spiders. Fear is conditioned into us. Fear is just as much irrational as it can be genuinely rational in certain circumstances. Certainly some are more inclined to believe what they're told than others. As I started the post by saying it's possible for more than one thing to be true. I'm not trying to suggest that for some it didn't feel a real threat to their lives but it wasn't a feeling shares by all those present which is really telling. If there's a genuine threat to your life then there's usually a weapon to hand or if not extreme violence involved. I've been in plenty of scrapes as a kid and as an adult which enables me to evaluate better than most I feel as to how a situation might play out. 

When I was 17 with no life experience I had a shotgun pointed at me out of a car window. I didn't run, I didn't say a word, I just stood there with my heart rate rising at a rate of knots. No words were exchanged, the window went back up and the car drove off. I don't mind admitting I shit myself. Not literally but figuratively. That was a more credible threat to life by way of comparison. I've had a group of people come out of a pub one of whom was carrying a baseball bat. My reaction was to laugh as I stood tall and didn't move. As I told the guy who had it in his hand he's not going to hit me with it in front of two dozen eye witnesses and I told them to fuck off back inside and to the amazement of my mates that's exactly what they did. On another occasion three of us found ourselves surrounded by a group of squaddies from up north who took offence to something one of my mates said which they misconstrued as an insult. I wasn't so much fearful that I'd get my head caved in but I did think if it kicked off I'd have to wade in at which point I was definitely getting my head kicked in. I somehow talked all our ways out of it. One night walking up the high street a woman walked past in distress and I could hear she'd been having an argument further up the road around a bend and out of sight and I asked her if she was OK and she screamed abuse at me and I thought well I've tried to do the right thing. I then carried on and clapped eyes on the partner who was double my size. I didn't make eye contact with him, didn't say a word and he punches me as I went to walk past him and catches the bone under my right eye. Half a centimetre higher and there's a chance I'd have been blinded for life. The bone swelled like one of those cartoon bumps and all that was missing were the little birds flying around. That made me wary of going out into town for an awful long time it must be said. So my reaction to a situation comes from a learned experience. Chances are for the majority in that room being professional athletes they've no experience of anything like that so it's worse than it seems for them than it was for others. There's a general rule of thumb in life as the bloke who hit me without warning can attest to, namely if you're going to do something to someone you don't warn them, you just do it. 99% of people are all talk, it's the 1% you need to worry about but not every day otherwise you'd never leave the house. 

So if you're confronted with a group of unarmed people screaming and shouting and the worst that's happening is the occasional punch or a slap, and there's more words than action then it's not a credible threat to life. No one is in a car pointing a gun at you. However if someone claims to know where I live and where my kids go to school then I'm not taking any chances just in case. True the players don't know how many more people might be outside but if it really kicked off then players would have fought back. If those who struck people with belts improvised their weapons then the players in real trouble would have done the same. What photos do we see after in the papers, online and on TV, those of the laceration to Bas Dost’s head. We don't see any other injuries. Seem strange? Remember Occam’s razor - that the simplest explanation when you've discounted all other possibilities is usually the right one? Meaning in this case we don't see any more evidence of injuries simply because there were no more. What is the club doctor Frederico Varandas doing when he's filmed walking out the dressing room? He's grinning like a Cheshire cat. What does that tell you? He's not leading a hurt or traumatised player away to the medical room. Look at the photo taken of the players stood standing around. What don't you see? There's no blood, torn clothes, they all just look inconvenienced, bemused even - what the fuck just happened there? Was it real? Which is why I surmise it was all blown out of total proportion. 

So why do some of the players make such a big deal out of it and why doesn't Bruno de Carvalho ever condemn the attacks? Well we know that for at least the past month that the players are sick of the club president and they want him out of the club or they themselves want a way out, whichever is easier and comes first. So it suits many of their purpose to go along with a certain narrative. Yes it's entirely plausible that some believed it was a genuine threat to life. Some may have seen it as a warning that something serious could actually happen one day. Yet I'm guessing most hoped it meant that Bruno de Carvalho would do the right thing and resign, which he didn't do. Eventually they get their wish one way or another. A handful of players rescind contracts and hasten their exits. Others who stay see the socios vote de Carvalho out of power. You can't change your initial testimony when it goes to trial because you'll be charged with perjury so you keep to the same narrative. For many that was that they thought they were doing to die. I'd love to be able to ask players how who were present on that day what really went on even if it was just off the record. Because it wouldn't surprise me to learn that they used it as payback and a way to get de Carvalho out of the club. The collective will is strong when people feel wronged and badly treated or let down. Remember they've been publicly called out by the man, insulted and ultimately suspended. They know the vast majority of fans are now on their side. Why not use it to their advantage and press home action that could see him gone?

But he doesn't go, doesn't condemn what happened, doesn't do the perceived right thing which is to resign. I can't believe I'm going to write this next part but I'm actually at the stage where I don't blame him. Yes if we scroll back up to the phone calls between him and Fernando Mendes if you told me you had evidence that he knew they'd be going to the training ground that week there is no part of me that would be surprised. However I don't think he'd ever be stupid enough to sanction players getting attacked even if it was a very minor attack on one or two. Yet do I think he'd have any issue with being told - we're going to go and shout at the players? Not at all. In fact I think he'd have given it his 100% backing.

The thing is for me if you're full of shit then your own nose for smelling out bullshit is going to be really good and whilst he has many enemies amongst the players and staff he'll have had people loyal to him who when he asks how bad was it would have told him what I think is the truth. Namely it wasn't that bad at all. Yes you had a few idiots shouting, there were flares lit, the odd slap, punch and kick but it was much of a nothingness. Bas Dost got hit with a belt which ruptured the skin causing bleeding, Jorge Jesus got punched on the nose but truthfully it was handbags at ten paces. An attempted power display by certain members of the Juve Leo out front and a few halfwits inside the complex.

So Bruno de Carvalho's failure to condemn the attacks is because to him there really wasn't anything to condemn. I think he's kind of right to. He's narcissistic, I'm autistic. He has apathy, I have empathy. Yet we both call a spade a spade. His handling of the situation was abysmal and that’s being polite. When he says people were using it as an opportunity against him he's a hundred percent correct. It's a golden opportunity for many to leverage what happened against him. There's no disputing that I don't think. It's not paranoia on his part. It's pay back. When you make so many enemies don't then be surprised when they're all handed a sharpened knife that they're all stood around ready to stab you with it. We both share a curse - If you ask me for the truth don't be offended when I tell you the truth because if you're not prepared to hear it then don't ask me. 

The thing is I can't play the game that was needed to be played in the immediate aftermath and neither could he but for very different reasons. I can tell you what he should have done, that part is easy enough. Hire me in a crisis because I can see the bigger picture, just don't be stupid enough for me to deliver the message. That's all He had to do. He simply needed to play that game which neither him nor me can do to our detriment. 

Looking at everything objectively eight years on I think it's a storm in a tea cup, people have made a mountain out of a molehill. It's something that was sensationalised and blown out of all proportion especially by the Portuguese media . I think that Bruno de Carvalho was acutely aware of all of that. He took it personally because it was deliberately made personal against him and so he got that part right at least. He just needed to be seen to say the right things to the right people. What he ends up doing is saying all the wrong things to the wrong people. I've accused him multiple times of playing the victim card… because it's true. Actually all things considered he does end up a victim. But only because of the part he caused in his own downfall. Equally as much as Fernando Mendes plays a part as a catalyst for what eventually happened with the fracas at Funchal Airport, then de Carvalho signed his own death warrant with the Facebook posts a month before and then suspending the players. Because he's right they do use it as leverage against him. The problem is for him is that the vast majority of people would probably say it was highly deserved when you consider everything in context. It doesn't mean he should be held responsible for what happens on the day however. He clearly didn't mastermind any attack because there was no planned attack. What he should have done was hold his hands up and tell the public that he acknowledges mistakes were made on his part in the past. I'm not saying he has to believe that. It would help if he did though, especially with players and coaching staff. But he has to be seen to admit his own short comings and come to a solution that benefits all parties involved. The players clearly wanted him gone. They didn't trust him as far as they could throw him and with good reason too I might add. So it's doubtful it would have worked but he had to be seen to be doing the dance and saying the right things publicly. He could have excused himself in certain circumstances. Found people willing to work as an intermediary on his behalf. Someone who would listen and try find a solution to their problems. Because clearly not every player wanted out of the club otherwise they'd all have rescinded their contracts. And yes having had time to think about it I don't think he's lying when he says William and Patrício used it to manufacture their exits. Yet I do not blame either player. Some of the things he says to both players and some of his actions are deplorable so why wouldn't they try take advantage? Neither is doing it if things weren't as bad as they were. In fact de Carvalho was the one who wanted William out of the club months before so he got his wish on that one anyway. 

What he should have done at the time of the attacks was delegate and made it at least appear like he took what happened seriously. Have a team of staff take the phone numbers from club records of family members and have them called straight away before they saw the news. Crisis management 1.01 - Take control of the situation and then you can try control the narrative. You don't even have to condemn what happens in your initial statement. You just have to be seen to be the one in control. Demonstrate that actually you perceive it to be serious even if you don't, that you'll do everything in your power to complete a full investigation, to assist the authorities in any way you can, but ask for understanding that your players and staff welfare is the most critical thing and that you'd appreciate if the media doesn't speculate at this time and allow everyone to do their due diligence on the situation and to ensure nothing similar can ever occur again. At the point a hundred reporters start asking questions you apologise and walk off. People just want to be told certain things, be able to tick the little invisible boxes in their head. It's expectations management. This is what I think should happen. Is what is happening falling in line with that? If the answer is even just roughly a yes then that will do for most people. There will however always be a group of people that think things that happen are personal to them even though they may have absolutely nothing to do with them at all. Football is rife with this strange phenomenon which is why footballers get so much unwarranted abuse online. It's fair to suggest that nothing ruins someone's weekend quite like a game of football. So there would still be dissenters in the ranks but if you'd done the first part right, then you can attack your critics. Because you didn't however you're painting yourself as the victim without acknowledging that generally it was a shit thing to happen but it certainly wasn't as bad as people seem to want to make it out the be. 

Does the failure to condemn the attacks paint him in the wrong light and ultimately end up with the accusation that he must therefore have masterminded the entire thing?

I'd never even considered it until three or fours days ago writing something else that actually there's a distinct possibility that this is actually the case. You've ascertained I don't think it was a planned attack and let's add in my belief that the entire court process was flawed from start to finish. At no stage does Bruno de Carvalho help himself with his words and his actions. 

We definitely know that neither Bruno de Carvalho, Nuno Mendes or Bruno Jacinto masterminded the attack because they were acquitted of every single one of the charges made against them which is important and telling because it proves that the prosecution made assumptions that they then tried to prove and failed to provide any evidence to corroborate. The former club president then finds himself on a hiding to nothing because they think he's got something to hide and he's acting defensive, in tandem with the fact he's never condemned what happened. Therefore an officer of the law, or of the courts, might well deduce that he therefore has something to hide. Couple that with the disdain he displays at Cândida Vilar and he's probably actually right when he feels she has a vendetta against him. He probably can't go more than a day without offending someone or other, it's just part of his nature for better or worse. Let's not forget this is a man who's had four failed marriages. I'm not sure he fully respects members of the opposite sex. 

If the trials were held locally and not moved to Lisboa with a new prosecution team led by a woman who had tried some very big high profile cases before, then I don't think we end up where we do. Vilar adds layers of complexity where none were needed. All charges relating to kidnapping and terrorism were unproven. Well no shit. All charges against the three accused moral authors unproven. Again no shit. It's like they read the previous rap sheet of some of the defendants that we mentioned in Part 11 and went - let's add that to the list. Look this one has been charged with kidnapping, someone claims they were told they couldn't leave the room, well let's call that kidnapping. How they got to charges of terrorism is fucking beyond me. I've not got a clue. Not all snowballs coming down a hill will turn into an avalanche. But when you're the one deliberately pushing the snowball down the hill then don't be surprised when it does turn into exactly that. 

So you could have had everyone for trespassing on private property. Charged some with assault. Accepted that what they were told was the truth, that in the main they were fans who thought they were going their to remonstrate with the players and be done with it. 

The narrative driven by the media and what happens in turn with the prosecution is quite frankly misleading. It's a series of coincidences used to explain something that looked related but in fact never actually were. It's a solution in search of a problem. Those coincidences are used as justification as to why the attacks on Alcochete happened especially by the Portuguese media and we all fell into the same trap of retelling the same narrative. Bruno de Carvalho said this on Facebook blah blah blah, that must mean blah, blah, blah. No it doesn't. That's just bollocks. It's like when someone dies in an unexpected way and you get a purring of grief and people saying if only I'd done this or that. Unless someone dies of carbon monoxide poisoning and you forgot to call the gas man out then stop trying to add links to a series of coincides. Just because Bruno de Carvalho lost his shit on Facebook does not mean he ordered the attacks on Alcochete. It just means he shouldn't be allowed within twenty feet of a keyboard when he's angry and emotional. 

Truthfully for me it's a story about a perceived entitlement of a tiny group of individuals. Series one was meant to just be the story of Bruno de Carvalho at Sporting CP. But it's impossible to tell it without telling the story of Alcochete and yes granted I didn't have to go into such lengths and details but if something is worth doing, it's worth doing properly. Besides I'm autistic and I got hyper focused. It was only at the end of my retelling, following the same well trodden path that my brain went - well that didn't add up at all. Actually I think it was probably more like - what a load of fucking bollocks. You see if you'd asked me what I knew about it before researching it I'd have trotted out the narrative that players were attacked, Bruno de Carvalho was accused and got off and given how crazy a time it was for the club if someone had said do you think he had something to do with it I'd have said yes. Yet when you study the case in detail and I mean really in detail, you can see it's all bollocks. When you want to find the critical pieces of information it's really hard which is why everyone is retelling the same old fucking narrative. It's bollocks. Complete and utter bollocks. 

This series has been about showing my maths homework because I have to walk you to how I've drawn my conclusions otherwise we all just end up on the wrong narrative path again and again. Everything that happens before the attacks is used as window dressing. They are a series of unhappy coincidences but coincidences nonetheless. 

What really matters happens decades before when the Juve Leo was setup and who it was setup by. Namely two sons of the then club president and therefore as a group they've been permitted access to the players from day one and that privilege was never revoked and it ends up being abused. That's the real story - an abuse of privilege and it's by taking a step back that allows you to see the bigger picture. Remember the line about just because something feels like it's personal to you, doesn't actually make it personal to you. Well it's the same principle. Fans only went that day because they thought they'd inherited that right of access that could only have come from how the group was originally formed. It might feel like they went because of a Facebook rant from Bruno de Carvalho a month earlier but it's not actually connected. It's no more true than the allegations about ticket sales and drug trafficking ever were.

When you look at the timeline between the defendants exiting their cars, running down the hill towards the Alcochete training complex, down through the large car park, making their way through security doors and getting to the players - that's the vast bulk of the time. The terrorising bit, the so called big attack that left some players fearing for their lives is over as quickly as most boys lose their virginity. It's painfully short. I'm prepared to believe it you were stood anywhere near one of the flares that the intense heat may have made you panic more, along with the sound of the fire alarms going off. Or the fact they had to break down doors to get to you. But apart from one of two complete nutters in the group you'd have probably taken your chances if your life really depends on it or just stood behind someone like Romain Salin who spends his days practicing to come off his line and punch things clear. I forget who Acuña chased off the pitch looking for a fight years later but there's plenty of video evidence of it and neither him or Battaglia were shying away from the confrontation at Funchal Airport. None of the players are going to ever admit to retaliation against anyone there but are we really to believe they all just stood back and let it happen to them in the manner described as being life threatening? I'm not buying it. Any player or member of staff who does retaliate will know surely they're acting in self defence. But why are those fans there in the first place? The basic message is you're not fit to wear the shirt. This isn't 40 members of the no name boys from Benfica storming the training complex of their rivals. Apart from the dick head who smacks Bas Dost with a belt, no one is actually trying to seriously injure the players five days out from the Taça de Portugal Final. You're not trying to nobble your own players. It's a demonstration of fan power. It's all stemming from they sense of entitlement that they are allowed the access and at the end of the day they're the heart of the club not the players. This theory that because you pay money to go see the team play gives you just cause to turn up at their place of work to verbally abuse them. They're all completely fucking delusional and mad on a little bit of power and too much historical access which they'd never have had off their own backs unless it had been inherited. You don't ever find this away from continental Europe. Yes in England you'll see fans at the end of games abusing players and occasionally you'll see the players go over and try to calm fans down. You don't see instances of them travelling with the team on the planes which is what used to happen with Sporting. I was going to write that you don't get leaders of supporters groups phoning the club owner demanding to know where a player lives because they don't have that type of access which is true. Oddly if you've read both series especially part 1 of the rise and fall of Bruno de Carvalho I think at times depending on who owned the Premier League club I grew up following that at different times I might have actually gotten that access given that my information was passed through the owners lawyers to a contact of mine and I had direct contact with several of the players. Huh. Hindsight is a wonderful thing for putting things into context. Anyways even if I did I wouldn't have done any of what happened so it doesn't matter.

In short not a planned attack. 

Yes it was a planned visit. 

We can surmise that Fernando Mendes was behind getting Válter Semedo and Tiago Silva to create the WhatsApp groups.

We know the pretence was that they were going there to remonstrate with the players whilst they were on the training pitch. 

We know Válter Semedo has connections to the football casuals and it's likely that he was the one that added them to the group. 

We think it's plausible that Bruno de Carvalho was told by Fernando Mendes they would visit when he was on the phone drunk to him. I'd forgotten that part. So let's surmise that de Carvalho merely thinks its drunken nonsense and doesn't take him seriously. 

We know why they ran, covered their faces and how everything shifts when they get there because the players aren't out training and that truthfully that's why things go south. It's just a quirk of fate.

The entire thing which involves the players specifically is over in about 3 or 4 minutes. 

We know any weapons were improvised. 

We know the two worst injuries sustained were the cut to Bas Dost's head and a bloody nose of the mister. 

We know from testimony of many defendants that it stops when one of them points out it wasn't supposed to go like this or words to that effect. So again clearly not a planned attack.

We know they'd no exit strategy because they weren't aware they needed one. It's only when some there start to attack players that it becomes apparent the GNR will turn up. It didn't enter their heads before and many believed it was an authorised visit because Nuno Mendes' name is deliberately included to mislead people into turning up. 

Not having been planned means no masterminds. 

No masterminds means the trial was flawed from start to finish. 

The prosecution tried the case wrong and tried to make it fit their assumptions rather than question whether their assumptions were right to begin with. 

We get the prosecution listening to gossip like the flares at the Dérbi were ordered by Bruno de Carvalho to be thrown at Patrício. Tickets are being used to fund drug trafficking. All complete bollocks. Why do we get those stories? Because they're all held on remand and trying to say anything to save their own skin. 

The players all wanted rid of Bruno de Carvalho.

Bruno de Carvalho doesn't condemn the attacks. 

The media go to town on him.

The prosecution charge him despite no evidence of any involvement and claim a series of coincidences caused it all meaning he must have been involved. 

The media steals the narrative which is the one we've all been retelling for eight years. 

Who do I think was telling the truth at the end of it all? When everything is totalled up and put in some semblance of order. It's fucking Bruno de Carvalho. Like what the actual fuck. Where did that come from? 

When you put your dislike of the man to one side and don't let it prejudice your thoughts what he says does add up and make sense. From day one he says he doesn't understand why he's on trial and eight years later neither do I, other than Cândida Vilar’s need to try the case as someone bigger than it ever was. It becomes a battle of egos at the Portuguese tax payers expense. 

Let's take a walkthrough the events in his shoes. The club have just been accused of match fixing and have the Portuguese authorities breaking down the clubs doors, so the meetings he's in that day are probably crisis ones. He's got a cup final on the Sunday to deal with in turn. With the media spotlight already focused in on the club is he going to authorise an attack on his players? No. So he gets a phone call sometime after 5 and he's likely to have hit the roof and when he turns up at Alcochete the TV crews were already there because they'd been there all day. So now you've got the GNR investigating claims of match fixing and an attack on some of the players and staff and all of Portugal is going to be watching. He'll have had the lowdown before he left. Presumably the players can't get to their phones because the room is sealed off for the GNR investigators so he's fielding calls because the media is reporting live and they've no actual details and loved ones are panicking but he's been told it lasted about five minutes, Bas Dost has a small cut to the head, the mister has a bloody nose but other than some overturned furniture and a few slaps and shouting it was actually nothing really. So when he says families calling him was annoying whilst distasteful he's just telling the truth. There's more damage to doors than there is to players. 

When he arrives not only does he have the Portuguese media filming and busy speculating, he's a group of players who won't talk to him and they all think he's behind it. He doesn't condemn it or play the game because he sees it for what it is. Much of a nothingness. It's like a wasp circling round your pint in a beer garden and he can't understand the fuss, it's a mild irritation that would go away if you ignore it. Don't scream and make a fair fuss. This is what the media is forever doing now there's so much competition. If you only had one TV channel in Portugal for the news they wouldn't have to speculate, they'd simply say we'll tell you more when we know more. For de Carvalho it's an annoyance but despite what everyone thinks he had nothing to do with it and he's got work to do so could everyone politely fuck off and leave him be? He's got the Taça de Portugal on Sunday and the GNR want to take the clubs IT infrastructure away. For him this is not on his immediate list of priorities and neither is a group of grown men sulking refusing to talk to him. Frankly, everyone can fuck off. 

When he claims players use the attack to manufacture an exit I think he's completely right, especially in the case of Rui Patrício. Who was his agent? Who was the man that Bruno de Carvalho made persona non grata at the club and made several players change agents from? One and the same person - Jorge Mendes. I believe him. I believe him when he claims that it's a vendetta against him. I don't think it's paranoia on his part. I think it's payback. At some point in all our lives we have to pay the bill for our actions and our behaviour. Most people have a very defined perception of the man. The only person who thinks and speaks highly of Bruno de Carvalho is … Bruno de Carvalho. As I wrote earlier it's a solution that needs a problem. So the Sporting SAD call an extraordinary general assembly to oust him but they don't get their hands dirty they let the socios decide his fate. Nicely played. The people have spoken. Then they ensure that's his membership is revoked and forever close the door on him. He's made a scapegoat and by the time the courts clear him they've long since moved on. All he's left with is a damaged reputation because the Portuguese media went to town on him. I never did bother to look for the stories that claimed he was a drug addict and a wife beater. You imagine if they were online someone would have had the sense to take them down after 8 years anyway. It's disgusting the way he's treated but as they say what goes around comes around though two wrongs don't make a right and this is turning into cliché corner.

Strip away all the unhappy coincidences that read like contributing factors but really aren't, what are you left with? The obvious answer is that it simply got out of hand. The next most plausible is that Fernando Mendes manipulated the situation to his advantage. That he walks in at the end under the presence he's going to continue his conversation with the mister from Funchal airport but he's taken along a bit of muscle to get retribution on Marcus Acuña but without getting his hands dirty. Or him and Tiago Silva concoct it all to get back at Acuña and Battaglia. They manipulate Bruno Jacinto and it's all a show of their power. Aren't we clever, look at what we can do and the hold we have over you. Then it goes south, players end up attacked and because of previous convictions they end up in prison thinking they're not so clever after all. 

That's it - that's the story of Alcochete. A planned show of power by people who had their noses pushed out of joint. The rest is coincidence. 

A few idiots with flares are neither here nor there. It's the fear or the unknown, of what could they actually organise if given enough time? What happens if they were armed? What happens if they do know where they live and where their kids go to school. They were all told that fans had asked for Marcus Acuña's address. They all think he planned it so would he be capable of handing addresses over too? That's a rational and genuine fear. The rest? I'm sorry but I think it's hyperbole which is politer than saying its bollocks. 

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury I rest my case.