There is another thing about the case filed against Senator Ping Lacson that tends to show how the DOJ of the past administration did everything in seeming haste and with an eye for a "deadline".
The case filed against the original accused in the Dacer-Corbito case was "Double Murder".
The case filed against Senator Ping Lacson in the Dacer-Corbito case was "Two Counts of Murder".
Nobody can argue that it was one and the same case. But why the difference?
Well, the DOJ did a legal maneuver by calling it "Two Counts of Murder" as it applied to Senator Lacson. That was because at the start of their preliminary investigation against Ping, they claimed IT IS A DIFFERENT CASE. Why would they do that?
Had they admitted at the time that it is ONE AND THE SAME CASE, as Ping's lawyer contended, the DOJ would have to seek a LEAVE OF COURT before conducting the preliminary investigation against Ping. That means they would spend more time before they could file the case against Ping. They would not be able to complete everything before the Arroyo administration stepped out of Malacanang and a new president took over. So they held on to the position that it is a DIFFERENT CASE and proceeded with their preliminary investigation WITHOUT LEAVE OF COURT.
But once the preliminary investigation was completed and a DOJ resolution was submitted to the court, the DOJ went along with the position of Ping's lawyer that it is ONE AND THE SAME CASE and that the case filed against Ping ought to be CONSOLIDATED WITH THE ORIGINAL CASE. That is why we can call it a legal maneuver. A sort of DIRTY TRICK that was consciously employed.
Remember when we were kids, a boy used to hold a flower in his hands, muttering as he removed its petals one by one: "She loves me, she loves me not, she loves me, she loves me not....."?
The DOJ did the same thing quite quickly: "DIFFERENT, THE SAME"!
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Monday, January 3, 2011
The Real Issue: Probable Cause
Probable cause or bare suspicion?
1. Can uncorroborated testimony be accepted as probable cause?
2. Can hearsay be accepted as evidence in court?
3. Can "non-sequitur" be a valid argument for proving an allegation?
4. Is the head of a police unit responsible for criminal acts of people under his command?
5. Does the inconsistent testimony of one person carry more weight than the consistent testimony of three witnesses?
The answer to every question above is NO. Therefore, there is no probable cause to charge Senator Ping Lacson for the murder of Dacer and Corbito.
Mancao said he heard a conversation inside a car. But he told everyone about it nine years after the alleged conversation took place, with "guidance" from the DOJ panel, with the threat of extradition and criminal prosecution hanging above his head.
Nobody except himself says that he heard such a conversation. If the two people talking inside the car were so careless in talking about a plot to murder somebody, it stands to reason that they should also be careless in talking about it in some other place, in front of some other people.
That letter that Dacer wrote to Estrada maligning Ping. If that is evidence against the maligned person, that would seem to be a perverted way to look at evidence. There is no proof that Senator Ping Lacson knew about that letter until Dacer disappeared.
The letter plus the tale of the Dacer sisters that their father pointed to Ping as the one responsible in case something happens to him are all unrelated to the disappearance of Dacer and by any stretch of imagination cannot be taken as evidence that Ping wanted Dacer dead.
If command responsibility is defined as being responsible for every illegal or criminal act of every person under your command in a police organization, all our police officers would be in jail right now.
Three people - Dumlao, Aquino and Oximoso all said Ping is innocent of this crime. Only Mancao says so and he was recorded as saying in the past that he was being pressured or enticed to fabricate charges against Ping. His recall of when the event inside the car took place proves he was not telling the truth. Taking for granted that there was really a conversation, he admitted he may not have heard everything right.
Justice equates to truth. It cannot be used to uphold untruth.
1. Can uncorroborated testimony be accepted as probable cause?
2. Can hearsay be accepted as evidence in court?
3. Can "non-sequitur" be a valid argument for proving an allegation?
4. Is the head of a police unit responsible for criminal acts of people under his command?
5. Does the inconsistent testimony of one person carry more weight than the consistent testimony of three witnesses?
The answer to every question above is NO. Therefore, there is no probable cause to charge Senator Ping Lacson for the murder of Dacer and Corbito.
Mancao said he heard a conversation inside a car. But he told everyone about it nine years after the alleged conversation took place, with "guidance" from the DOJ panel, with the threat of extradition and criminal prosecution hanging above his head.
Nobody except himself says that he heard such a conversation. If the two people talking inside the car were so careless in talking about a plot to murder somebody, it stands to reason that they should also be careless in talking about it in some other place, in front of some other people.
That letter that Dacer wrote to Estrada maligning Ping. If that is evidence against the maligned person, that would seem to be a perverted way to look at evidence. There is no proof that Senator Ping Lacson knew about that letter until Dacer disappeared.
The letter plus the tale of the Dacer sisters that their father pointed to Ping as the one responsible in case something happens to him are all unrelated to the disappearance of Dacer and by any stretch of imagination cannot be taken as evidence that Ping wanted Dacer dead.
If command responsibility is defined as being responsible for every illegal or criminal act of every person under your command in a police organization, all our police officers would be in jail right now.
Three people - Dumlao, Aquino and Oximoso all said Ping is innocent of this crime. Only Mancao says so and he was recorded as saying in the past that he was being pressured or enticed to fabricate charges against Ping. His recall of when the event inside the car took place proves he was not telling the truth. Taking for granted that there was really a conversation, he admitted he may not have heard everything right.
Justice equates to truth. It cannot be used to uphold untruth.
Common Sense
For people who use their common sense, the following should be obvious by now:
1-The Dacer sisters filed a complaint against Ping, believing that he knows something about the murder of their father, even if in their hearts and minds, they probably do not believe it was Ping who wanted their father killed. They want Ping to tell them who the real mastermind is. But it is not Ping's obligation to them to solve the murder case, and the method they are employing to make him do it is most foul.
2-The previous DOJ filed the complaint against Ping, as part of an evil conspiracy to get even with him because of his strong stand against graft and corruption during the previous administration wherein he earned the ire of those in power. They themselves know there is no case against Ping. They only want him to suffer. It is vengeance and not the quest for justice that moves them.
3-Mancao executed a written affidavit against Ping which is full of holes and inconsistencies to protect himself from prosecution as an accused in the murder case. As Dumlao said, Mancao does not know anything about this murder case but unlike Dumlao, Mancao has a weak character. He is a shame to the Phil Military Academy.
4-Ping has not surfaced because it would be extreme injustice to be jailed for a crime someone did not commit. Everybody and his uncle knows Ping will not be convicted of this crime because the evidence is not only weak; it is fabricated. But who wants to sit inside a prison cell for ten or fifteen years, as in the case of Hubert Webb, only to be pronounced not guilty after consummation of all court proceedings?
1-The Dacer sisters filed a complaint against Ping, believing that he knows something about the murder of their father, even if in their hearts and minds, they probably do not believe it was Ping who wanted their father killed. They want Ping to tell them who the real mastermind is. But it is not Ping's obligation to them to solve the murder case, and the method they are employing to make him do it is most foul.
2-The previous DOJ filed the complaint against Ping, as part of an evil conspiracy to get even with him because of his strong stand against graft and corruption during the previous administration wherein he earned the ire of those in power. They themselves know there is no case against Ping. They only want him to suffer. It is vengeance and not the quest for justice that moves them.
3-Mancao executed a written affidavit against Ping which is full of holes and inconsistencies to protect himself from prosecution as an accused in the murder case. As Dumlao said, Mancao does not know anything about this murder case but unlike Dumlao, Mancao has a weak character. He is a shame to the Phil Military Academy.
4-Ping has not surfaced because it would be extreme injustice to be jailed for a crime someone did not commit. Everybody and his uncle knows Ping will not be convicted of this crime because the evidence is not only weak; it is fabricated. But who wants to sit inside a prison cell for ten or fifteen years, as in the case of Hubert Webb, only to be pronounced not guilty after consummation of all court proceedings?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)