Maria Margarida Braz's Right of Reply

The publication of this Right of Reply by Professor Maria Margarida Braz, a professor at the Torres Vedras Conservatory of Music, to the article "Messages via social media, sending videos, and rides to commit crimes. How the conductor accused of sexual abuse acted" is done under the Press Law.

Regarding the news item entitled "Messages via social media, sending videos and rides to commit crimes. How the conductor accused of sexual abuse acted," published online by Observador on July 15, 2025, I would like to clarify the following:

The article in question, written by journalist Leonor Riso, Deputy Society Editor, should have been more rigorous and less ambiguous in its references to my name and position at the Torres Vedras Music Conservatory. Indeed, whether due to its poor writing or the journalist's inability to explain to readers what happened, the article could be interpreted as detrimental to the reputation and goodwill that any teacher, or other professional, strives to maintain.

The news report states that "no one from Physics contacted the authorities, an action that even led the investigating judge to censure the actions of the school and three teachers (...) for trying to suppress, devalue, and ignore the complaints made by the two students." I am named as one of these teachers. Now, the final sentence has four subjects: Physics plus three identified teachers. The subject of "trying to suppress" is not explicitly stated. Was it the school? Was it one of the teachers? Certainly not all of them, because then the journalist would have written "they tried to suppress."

However, I can assure you that I cannot be the subject of such egregious conduct, since I did not suppress, downplay, or ignore any of the facts that are the subject of this report. "Suppress," besides indicating intentional rather than merely negligent action, refers us to the deeper intricacies of criminal activity.

Without going into details that I consider unnecessary, given the sensitivity of the situation, all the facts I learned were immediately forwarded to the School's Pedagogical Directorate. Furthermore, I was not even questioned by any investigative body or called to testify as a witness. I received no censure from any judge, magistrate, or court official, which could not have occurred without me being given the opportunity to exercise my right to a rebuttal. A healthy society cannot tolerate unaddressed censure without due rebuttal, a principle that, unfortunately, the journalist overlooked.

The news in question, besides the distress it caused me, seeing my name unfairly and infamously implicated in a poorly written and inaccurate piece of journalism, has another drawback. The artistic teaching of an instrument is individualized, so the number of students I teach is very small and easily identifiable. As a result, my students were exposed to the undesirable effects of the news, thus neglecting the protection guarantees for children and young people.

Just as I was not heard by any authority, the journalist also neglected her duty to hear me, violating the legal duty enshrined in paragraph e) of paragraph 1 of article 14 of the Journalist's Statute, as well as paragraph 1 of her Code of Ethics.”