PAGTATANGGOL SA KARANGALAN NG PAMILYA
SA BAWAT PAMILYANG PILIPINO, MAY DALAWANG BAGAY NA BINIBIGYAN NG IBAYONG HALAGA: KARANGALAN AT TAHANAN.
ANG AMING KAPATID NA SI SENADOR PANFILO “PING” LACSON AY INAKUSAHANG UTAK SA PAGPATAY KAY SALVADOR “BUBBY” DACER AT SA KANYANG TSUPER. ANG PANGUNAHING KATIBAYANG GINAMIT BILANG “PROBABLE CAUSE” LABAN SA KANYA NG DOJ SA NAKARAANG ADMINISTRASYON AY ANG PINANUMPAANG SALAYSAY NI CEZAR MANCAO. SA NASABING SALAYSAY, IDINETALYE NI MANCAO ANG ANIYA’Y NARINIG NIYANG PAG-UUSAP SA PAGITAN NINA PING AT MICHAEL RAY AQUINO. INUTUSAN DAW NI PING SI AQUINO NA IPAPATAY SI DACER. DI UMANO AY NARINIG NIYA ANG PAG-UUSAP NA ITO SAMANTALANG SIYA AY NAKA-UPO SA GAWING UNAHAN NG SASAKYAN KATABI NG NOO’Y NAGMAMANEHONG “DRIVER” NG SENADOR NA SI REYNALDO OXIMOSO. NAKA-UPO NAMAN UMANO SA LIKURAN NG SASAKYAN SINA PING AT AQUINO.
UPANG MAPAGTIBAY ANG TINATAWAG NA “PROBABLE CAUSE” SA ISANG KASO NG KRIMEN, KAILANGANG ITO AY KAPANI-PANIWALA PARA SA MGA NAG-IIMBESTIGA AT SA HUWES NA MAY HAWAK NG KASO. DAPAT MAPAGPASIYAHAN SA PAMAMAGITAN NG MATUWID NA KAISIPAN NA ANG ISANG AKUSADO AY MAYROON NGANG PANANAGUTAN.
KAMI AY NANINIWALA NA KUNG MAINGAT NA ISASAALANG-ALANG ANG MGA SUMUSUNOD AY MABUBUO ANG KATOTOHANAN AT KONKLUSYON NA ANG NILAGDAANG SALAYSAY NI MANCAO AY MGA PINAGTAHI-TAHING KASINUNGALINGAN LAMANG:
1. ITINANGGI NI OXIMOSO SA ISANG SINUMPAANG SALAYSAY SA KORTE NA NAGKAROON NG GAYONG PAG-UUSAP SA SASAKYANG MINAMANEHO NIYA. NILIWANAG PA NA SA BUONG PANAHON NA SIYA AY NAGLINGKOD BILANG “SECURITY-AIDE, DRIVER” NI PING, ANG PINAPAHINTULUTAN LAMANG UMUPO SA UNAHAN KATABI NG “DRIVER” AY ANG “AIDE DE CAMP” NG SENADOR; KAYA’T WALANG KATOTOHANAN ANG SINABI NI MANCAO NA SIYA AY NAKA-UPO DOON. IDINAGDAG PA NI OXIMOSO SA KANYANG “AFFIDAVIT” NA HINDI KAILANMAN NAGKASAMA-SAMA SA KANYANG SASAKYANG MINAMANEHO NANG MGA PANAHONG IYON SINA PING, AQUINO AT MANCAO. GAYUNDIN, SI AQUINO AY NAGBIGAY NG SINUMPAANG SALAYSAY SA KONSULADO NG PILIPINAS SA AMERIKA NA SA BUONG PANAHON NG KANYANG PANUNUNGKULAN BILANG HEPE SA OPERASYON NG PAOCTF AY HINDI KAILANMAN SILA NAGKASAMANG TATLO NINA PING AT MANCAO SA IISANG SASAKYAN. TANDISAN NIYANG ITINANGGI NA MAYROON SIYANG TINANGGAP NA UTOS MULA KAY PING UPANG IPAPATAY SI DACER O SINO PA MANG TINUTUKOY NA “BERO” AT “DELTA”.
2. MISMONG “AFFIDAVIT” NI MANCAO ANG MAGPAPATUNAY NA ANG NILALAMAN NITO AY PAWANG KASINUNGALINGAN AT GAWA-GAWA LAMANG. DOON AY SINABI NIYA NA ANG USAPAN SA LOOB NG SASAKYAN AY NAGANAP NOONG OKTUBRE 2000. NGUNIT NILIWANAG NIYA SA ISANG PAGDINIG SA KORTE NG KANYANG PETISYON PARA MAGING “STATE WITNESS” NA ANG PAG-UUSAP SA SASAKYAN AY NANGYARI BUWAN NG SETYEMBRE 2000 O MGA UNANG ARAW NG OKTUBRE 2000. IDINAGDAG PA NIYA NA NATATANDAAN NIYA ITONG MABUTI SAPAGKAT ITO AY NANGYARI NANG MGA PANAHONG ANG DATING PANGULONG ESTRADA AY NASA LABAS NG BANSA. ANG KANYANG PAHAYAG NA ITO AY MALAYA NIYANG GINAWA SA PAGTATANONG NG TAGA-USIG NG DOJ NA SI HAZEL VALDEZ. NALIMUTAN NI MANCAO NA GAYA NG PINATUNAYAN SA MGA SINUMPAANG SALAYSAY NG DATING SENADOR MAR ROXAS AT “UNDERSECRETARY” MIKE TOLEDO, NANG MGA PANAHONG IYON AY MAGKAKASAMA SILA NINA PING AT PRESIDENTE ESTRADA SA AMERIKA PARA SA ISANG “OFFICIAL VISIT.” PARA NAMANG PINAGTIYAP NG PANGYAYARI NA ANG TAGA-USIG NG DOJ NA SI HAZEL VALDEZ AY MAY BAHAGI SA PAG-GAWA NG “AFFIDAVIT” NI MANCAO NA MAY PETSANG PEBRERO 14, 2009, ARAW NG SABADO. ISANG “NON-WORKING DAY” NANG MANUMPA SI MANCAO SA HARAP NG KONSUL NG PILIPINAS SA AMERIKA NA SINAMAHAN PA NI VALDEZ SA LOOB NG PIITAN SAPAGKAT SI MANCAO AY NAKAKULONG DOON.
3. LALONG NAGING MALIWANAG NA BATBAT NG KASINUNGALINGAN ANG “AFFIDAVIT” NI MANCAO SAPAGKAT ILANG BUWAN BAGO NIYA ITO LAGDAAN , NANG NASA AMERIKA PA SIYA AY MAYROON SIYANG “INTERVIEW” SA RADYO DZMM AT MAGING SA TELEBISYON SA “CHANNEL 7” KUNG SAAN AY NAGPAHAYAG SIYA NA INA-AMUKI SIYA NG “PRESIDENTIAL SECURITY CHIEF” NA SI GENERAL PRESTOZA NA IDAWIT SI PING SA KASONG PAGPATAY KAY DACER. ANG ALOK AY I-“RELOCATE” SIYA, SAMPU NG KANYANG PAMILYA SA SINGAPORE NA LIBRE LAHAT ANG GASTOS. NAKAPAGTATAKA BA NA MARAHUYO SI MANCAO SA MAGANDANG ALOK KAPALIT NG PAGIGING “STATE WITNESS” LABAN KAY PING?
4. IPAGPALAGAY NANG TOTOO, KAHIT PARANG KWENTONG KUTSERO KUMBAGA, NA MAYROON NGANG NAGANAP NA PAG-UUSAP SA LOOB NG SASAKYAN. SI MANCAO AY UMAMIN NAMAN SA ISANG “HEARING” NA HINDI TALAGA SIYA NAKATITIYAK TUNGKOL SA KANYANG MGA NARINIG.
5. NANGINGIBABAW SA LAHAT NG ITO ANG TESTIMONYA NI GLENN DUMLAO SA MARAMING “AFFIDAVIT” NA KUSANG LOOB NIYANG NILAGDAAN ANG PAGPAPATUNAY NA TALAGANG WALANG KINALAMAN SI PING SA KRIMENG IBINIBINTANG. ISA SA MGA “AFFIDAVIT” NA IYON ANG NAGLALARAWAN KUNG PAANO SIYA PINAHIRAPAN NG MGA PINUNO NG NAGDAANG ADMINISTRASYON; PISIKAL, MENTAL AT EMOSYONAL PARA LAMANG PILITIN NA IDAWIT NIYA SI PING SA KASONG DACER-CORBITO “DOUBLE MURDER CASE”. SUBALIT SIYA AY PATULOY NA NANINDIGAN SA NGALAN NG KATOTOHANAN. SUBALIT SA KABILA NG MGA GAWA-GAWANG EBIDENSYA LABAN KAY PING, ANG DATING PAMUNUAN NG DOJ AY TULUYANG NAGSAMPA NG KASO. AT ANG KORTE NAMAN AY NAGLABAS NG “WARRANT OF ARREST” BAGO MATAPOS ANG TERMINO NG NAGDAANG ADMINISTRASYONG NIYANIG NI PING SA PAGBUBULGAR NG KATAKOT-TAKOT NA KORAPSYON.
SA PAGNANAIS NA PALAKASIN ANG KASO LABAN KAY PING, ANG DATING DOJ AY MAYROON PANG SINASABING SULAT NI DACER KAY ESTRADA NA NANINIRA KAY PING NA WALA NAMANG IPINAKITANG PATUNAY NA IYON AY NAKARATING SA KAALAMAN NI PING. MAYROON DIN DAW USAP USAPAN NA NAGKU-KWENTO SI DACER SA MGA ANAK NA ANUMAN ANG MANGYARI SA KANYA AY SI PING ANG MAY KINALAMAN AT DAPAT SISIHIN. ANG MGA ALEGASYON NA KATULAD NITO ANG MAGPAPATUNAY SA KAWALAN NG MALIWANAG AT MATIBAY NA EBIDENSYA NA MAARING TAWAGING “PROBABLE CAUSE”.
SA HULING PASKO NA NAGKASAMA SAMA KAMING MAGKAKAPATID KABILANG SI PING AY NAGPAHAYAG SIYA NG PAGKABAHALA SA PAGPIPILIT NG NAKARAANG ADMINISTRASYON NA MAKAKUHA NG “WARRANT OF ARREST” LABAN SA KANYA. SUBALIT KANYANG SINABI SA AMIN NA MAAARI NAMING IPANATAG ANG AMING KALOOBAN SA KATOTOHANAN NA INOSENTE SIYA SA KASALANANG IBINIBINTANG SA KANYA.
BAGO PA LUMABAS ANG “WARRANT OF ARREST”, NAGPASIYA SI PING NA IWASAN ANG INAASAHANG PAGDAKIP SA KANYA. IYON AY SARILI NIYANG DESISYON, WALANG KINALAMAN ANG KARUWAGAN O PAGIGING “GUILTY”. BILANG ISANG DATING “INTELLIGENCE OFFICER” NG PNP, MAYROON SIYANG IMPORMASYON NA HINDI NA NIYA IPINALIWANAG SA AMIN. ANG ISANG NABANGGIT NA ALAM NA ALAM NIYA, ANG “RTC JUDGE” NA MAY HAWAK NG KASO AY MAYROONG APLIKASYON PARA MAGING “JUSTICE” SA “COURT OF APPEALS”. HINDI NA KAILANGANG HULAAN PA ANG SUSUNOD NA MANGYAYARI.
HINDI NGA NAGKABULA ANG INIISIP NI PING. ARAW NG BIERNES, PEBRERO 5, 2010, LUMABAS ANG “WARRANT OF ARREST”. LUNES, PEBRERO 8, 2010, ANG NASABING HUWES AY INENDORSO NG “JUDICIAL BAR COUNCIL” KAY PRESIDENTE GLORIA ARROYO AT PAGKARAAN NGA NG ISANG BUWAN AY NA-“PROMOTE” SA “COURT OF APPEALS”.
MULA NOON, TULUYAN NANG HINDI NAGPAKITA SI PING AT NAGPASIYANG IWASAN MUNA ANG NAPAKALAKAS NA PUWERSA NG KASAMAAN. WARI AY BUO NA ANG PASIYANG PATAHIMIKIN SIYA NG MGA TAONG NASAGASAAN NG KANYANG LABAN SA KATIWALIAN SA GOBYERNO. HINDI NIYA MATANGGAP NA MAYROONG KARANGALAN NA MAGPASAKOP SA PAGTATAGUMPAY NG KASAMAAN.
ANG ISANG TAO AY KINIKILALANG WALANG SALA HANGGA’T HINDI NAPAPATUNAYAN ANG MGA BINTANG SA KANYA. SUBALIT KAPAG HINDI SIYA PINANHINTULUTANG MAG-PIYANSA , SA TOTOO LAMANG AY NAUNA NA ANG PARUSA SA SENTENSYA. ANG AKUSADO AY MAGDUDUSA SA PIITAN BAGO PA MAN MAHATULAN. ANG KONSTITUSYON NG PILIPINAS AY NAGSASABING HINDI PAPAYAGANG MAGPIYANSA ANG AKUSADO KAPAG MATIBAY ANG EBIDENSYA LABAN SA KANYA. SA KASO NI PING, HINDI LAMANG MAHINA ANG EBIDENSYA. ITO AY GAWA-GAWA LAMANG AT MGA PINAGTAHI-TAHING KASINUNGALINGAN . ISANG “AFFIDAVIT” NA SALUNGAT SA NAUNANG SALAYSAY NG MISMONG NAG-AAKUSA AT SALUNGAT DIN SA PAHAYAG NG MGA TAONG BINABANGGIT AT ITINURO NIYANG MAGKAKASAMA AT NAG-UUSAP. SI MANCAO AY ISANG HINDI MAPAGKAKATIWALAANG TESTIGO KAYA’T KAMI AY LABIS NA NAGTATAKA SA PATULOY NA PAGTANGGI NG DOJ SECRETARY PARA MAGKAROON NG “RE-INVESTIGATION” KAHIT NA NGA NASABI NA NIYA NA SAKOP IYON NG KANYANG “PLENARY POWERS”, AT SA KABILA NG NAGLITAWANG PRUWEBA SA PAHAYAG NINA OXIMOSO AT MICHAEL RAY AQUINO. POSIBLE KAYA NA HINDI WASTO ANG IPINAPAYO SA KANYA NG MGA DOJ PROSECUTORS NA SIYANG NAGSAMPA NG KASO?
1. HINDI BA PRAKTIKAL LAMANG NA BIGYANG TIMBANG ANG MGA SINUMPAANG PAHAYAG NG TATLONG TAO LABAN SA KWENTO LAMANG NG ISANG TESTIGO NA UMAMIN PANG HINDI SIGURADO SA KANYANG NARINIG? AT ILANG BUWAN BAGO TUMESTIGO AY INAALOK NG DATING GOBYERNO, AYON MISMO SA KANYA, PARA IDIIN SI PING KAPALIT NG NAKARARAHUYONG PANGAKO? WALA BANG HALAGA ANG PAHAYAG NI DUMLAO KUNG PAANO SIYA PINAHIRAPAN PARA LAMANG PILITIN NA IDIIN SI PING SA KASO?
2. IPALAGAY NATING TOTOO KAHIT KASINUNGALINGAN ANG KWENTO NI MANCAO NA PINAGUSAPAN ANG PAGPATAY KAY DACER SA LOOB NG SASAKYAN. SINO ANG SINASABING “BIGOTE” NA SIYANG UTAK SA PAGPATAY KAY DACER? BAKIT HINDI SIYA KILALANIN AT USIGIN SA HALIP NA SI PING ANG PILIT NA INAAKUSAHANG “MASTERMIND”? HINDI BA NAMAN MASYADONG HALATA NA ANG PAKAY LAMANG NILA AY IPAKULONG SI PING?
3. AT PAANO MANGYAYARI NA SAMANTALANG SI PING AY NASA ESTADOS UNIDOS AY MAKAKASAMA SIYA SA SASAKYAN NINA MANCAO AT AQUINO SA GREENHILLS ? HINDI BA’T MALIWANAG NA KABULAANAN ANG NILALAMAN NG “AFFIDAVIT” NI MANCAO?
4. ANG NILALAMAN NG “AFFIDAVIT” NI MANCAO AY TUWIRAN NANG KINONTRA SA NAGING PAHAYAG NG KANYANG ABOGADO SA HUSGADO : “HE ONLY LEARNED OF THE SORDID AFFAIR EX POST FACTO”. IBIG SABIHIN, NALAMAN LAMANG NI MANCAO ANG TUNGKOL SA KRIMEN MATAPOS NA ITO AY MANGYARI NA. SAMAKATUWID, SI MANCAO AY WALA TALAGANG ALAM SA SINASABI NIYANG PLANO NG PAGPATAY KATULAD NG PAULIT-ULIT NA SINASABI NIYA KAY DUMLAO NANG SILA AY MAGKASAMA PA SA AMERICA. TUGMA ITO SA MGA PAHAYAG NI DUMLAO SA KANYA NAMANG “AFFIDAVIT” NA WALA TALAGANG ALAM SI MANCAO BAGO MANGYARI ANG KRIMEN.
KUNG ANG MAPAGNAKAWAN NG ISANG MAHALAGANG BAGAY AY MASAKIT, HINDI MASUSUKAT NA KIROT AT PAIT ANG MAPAGNAKAWAN NG KARANGALAN ANG ISANG PAMILYA. SA NGAYON AY HINDI NAKAPIIT ANG AMING KAPATID, SUBALIT DAMA NAMING LAHAT ANG LABIS NIYANG PAGHIHIRAP. ANG PAGHIHIRAP SA ISIP AT DAMDAMIN AY MAS MAHAPDI KAYSA PISIKAL NA SAKIT. ANG MAPALAYO SA SARILING TAHANAN AT MGA MAHAL SA BUHAY AY SADYANG NAPAKAPAIT. IPINAPANALANGIN NAMING MAGKAKAPATID NA MAKAPILING SI PING NGAYONG PASKO KAHIT NA SA ISANG SIMPLENG PAGSASALO-SALO. GAYA NG KAUGALIAN NATING MGA PILIPINO.
ISANG KAIBIGAN ANG NAGPADALA SA AMIN NG MENSAHE: “MULA SA MAKAPAL AT MADILIM NA ULAP, ANG DALISAY NA TUBIG ULAN AY BIYAYANG PAPATAK; SA MALALIM AT MADILIM NA MINAHAN, ANG MAMAHALING BATO AT METAL AY MATATAGPUAN. AT SA PINAKAMABIBIGAT NA PAGSUBOK NG BUHAY, LUBOS ANG BASBAS AT BIYAYA ANG POONG MAYKAPAL.” ITO AY AMING PINANINIWALAAN. ANG KATOTOHANAN AT ANG KATARUNGAN AY MANANAIG. ANG DIYOS AY HINDI NATUTULOG.
PANSAMANTALA’Y MAGPAPASALAMAT KAMI SA LAHAT NG KASAMA NAMIN SA PANANALANGIN SA PAGTATAGUYOD NG KATOTOHANAN AT KATARUNGAN.
KAMING MGA KAPATID NI SENADOR PANFILO “PING” LACSON.
ROMULO LACSON FELICIANO LACSON REYNALDO LACSON JUANITO LACSON
ERNANI LACSON MA. CORAZON LACSON- MAGPAYO MA. CRISTINA LACSON- DIAZ
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Reason Versus Sensationalism
In Defense of Our Family’s Honor
In every Filipino family, two things are most treasured: honor and home.
Our brother, Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson is accused of masterminding the murder of Salvador “Bubby” Dacer and his driver. The principal evidence against him that the previous administration’s DOJ investigating panel and the court considered “probable cause” was an affidavit by a lone witness, Cesar Mancao. In that affidavit, Mancao narrated a supposed conversation inside a car between Ping and Michael Ray Aquino wherein Ping allegedly ordered Aquino to have Dacer murdered. He claimed to have overheard the conversation while seated at the front seat of the car next to Ping’s driver, Reynaldo Oximoso, while Ping and Aquino were at the backseat.
To establish “probable cause”, the investigators and the judge must find the evidence credible. It must lead a reasonable person to believe that the person being accused committed a crime.
We believe that a careful consideration of the following facts will lead reasonable person to a conclusion that Mancao’s allegation in his affidavit was a fabrication and an absolute lie:
1. Oximoso denied in a sworn affidavit submitted to the court that such conversation or car ride ever happened. He explained that during the whole period that he served as Ping’s security aide-driver, the front seat was always reserved for the Aide de Camp. Therefore, Mancao’s claim that he occupied the front seat is not true. Oximoso also said that there was never a time that Ping, Aquino and Mancao rode together in a car during that period. Likewise, Aquino, in a sworn affidavit subscribed before a Philippine consul in the United States, denied having been in the same car as Ping and Mancao during the time that he was serving as PAOCTF Operations Division Chief, or having any conversation with Ping regarding any order or plan to liquidate or eliminate Dacer. He categorically denied ever receiving any order from Senator Lacson to liquidate any person, including a certain “Bero” or “Delta.”
2. Mancao unwittingly proved his own affidavit to be a fabrication and a lie. His sworn affidavit indicated that the alleged car conversation took place “sometime in October, 2000”. He clarified in a hearing for his petition to become a state witness that the car conversation took place “sometime in September, 2000 or early October, 2000”. He clarified that he could remember it very well because it happened during the time that then Pres. Estrada was out of the country. He made such clarification spontaneously upon direct examination conducted by DOJ prosecutor Hazel Valdez. He did so, however, oblivious to the fact as sworn to by Sen. Mar Roxas and Usec. Mike Toledo that at the time President Estrada was abroad and hence when the car conversation supposedly happened, Ping was with President Estrada, Usec. Toledo and Senator Mar Roxas on an official visit to the United States. Incidentally, DOJ prosecutor Hazel Valdez was part of the DOJ panel that drafted Mancao’s February 14, 2009 affidavit while both were in the U.S. Thereafter, Mancao was sworn to his affidavit in his U.S. detention cell by the Philippine consul on a weekend, accompanied by DOJ Prosecutor Valdez.
3. That Mancao’s affidavit was a fabrication is further bolstered by the fact that several months prior to its signing, Mancao who was in the United States at the time, was interviewed over radio station DZMM and over Channel 7. He freely talked about being contacted by Gen. Romeo Prestoza, then presidential security chief in Malacanang. He narrated in both interviews that Prestoza wanted him to implicate Ping in the Dacer murder case and in exchange, he would be discharged as accused and he would be relocated with his family to Singapore, all expense paid. Is it a far-fetched conclusion that when threatened with extradition and being charged in this murder case; Mancao chose the easy way out by agreeing to become a state “witness”?
4. Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the car conversation actually happened, Mancao admitted in a court hearing that he being seated at the front seat of the car with Ping and Aquino at the back seat, he was not at all certain what he actually heard.
5. On top of this is the testimony of Glenn Dumlao, who executed several affidavits attesting to Ping’s innocence of the crime. In one of his affidavits, he narrated how officials of the previous administration tortured him physically, mentally and emotionally so that he would implicate Ping, but he held on to the truth.
In spite of very weak evidence to support its case, the previous DOJ filed the complaint. The court issued a warrant for Ping’s arrest during the closing stage of the previous administration whose corrupt ways he exposed in many privilege speeches.
In an effort to strengthen a very weak case against Ping, the previous DOJ even cited a letter from Dacer to Estrada maligning Ping without submitting any proof that Ping knew about that letter. Another frequently told story is that Dacer allegedly told his daughters that if something happened to him, Ping was to blame. If these allegations proved anything, it is the fact that the case filed against Ping extremely suffers from lack of evidence to establish probable cause.
In our last Christmas together, Ping already told us of frantic moves of the previous administration to have an arrest warrant against him. He told us to take comfort in the fact that he had nothing to do with that crime.
Before the warrant for his arrest came out, Ping decided to become inaccessible. That was his personal decision. We understand that it had nothing to do with guilt or cowardice. He had enough information to base it on. For one, he knew then that the RTC judge was an applicant for promotion to the Court of Appeals. An evil trap was set by a perceived corrupt administration and it was about to be sprung on him.
Subsequent events validated his belief. On Friday, February 5, 2010, the RTC judge issued a warrant of arrest against him. On Monday, February 8, 2010 the Judicial and Bar Council recommended the judge to President Arroyo and she was promoted to the Court of Appeals one month later.
Ping became unreachable to avoid being a victim of an evil conspiracy to put him away because of his anti-graft and corruption crusade. Self-preservation is a natural human instinct. He did not regard letting evil triumph as an act of decency.
A person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. But with a non-bailable crime like murder, the reality is that punishment comes before conviction. The accused suffers in jail while a court trial is ongoing to prove his guilt or innocence. Our Constitution says that the right to bail can be denied when the evidence of guilt is strong. In the case filed against Ping, the evidence is not only weak; it is fabricated. Just one affidavit with a conflicting story by a witness of doubtful credibility against multiple exonerating affidavits and statements, including two previously made by the accusing witness (Mancao) is why we say it is.
Therefore, we are extremely puzzled why DOJ Secretary Delima continues to ignore calls for a reinvestigation of this case. According to the DOJ secretary’s interviews, she is waiting for additional evidence to start such a reinvestigation. If the foregoing facts are not enough, we do not know what else would justify a reinvestigation. We can only guess that public prosecutors at the DOJ who had a hand in filing this case are giving her the wrong counsel.
1. Setting legal technicalities and prejudgment aside, is it not common sense to give more weight to the testimony of three people against the uncorroborated account of one “witness”? That lone witness even admitted in court that he was not at all certain about what he heard. He freely said in two separate interviews with media months before that he was being enticed by the previous administration to implicate the senator in exchange for a comfortable life. Out of four alleged passengers in the car where the “incriminating” conversation supposedly happened, three have sworn that it never happened. Why give so much weight to Mancao’s affidavit and disregard Dumlao’s affidavit which contains vivid details of how he was tortured and threatened so that he would implicate Ping in the murder case?
2. Again, for the sake of argument and assuming that Mancao’s story is true, the invented conversation in the car referred to a certain “Bigote” as the mastermind for killing Dacer. Rather than trying to determine the true identity of “Bigote”, why did the previous DOJ instead charge Ping as mastermind? Is this not a tell-tale sign of a concerted effort to put him in jail?
3. Finally, is the physical impossibility of Ping who was travelling in the U.S. to be riding in a car to Greenhills with Mancao and Aquino not enough to deem Mancao’s affidavit as nothing but imaginary trash?
4. The most compelling proof that Mancao’s affidavit is a pure fabrication comes from Mancao himself. In a statement filed by his lawyer with the court, he declared that “he only learned of the sordid affair ex post facto” (after the fact). He is in reality being consistent with the affidavit that Dumlao testified to: Mancao knew nothing about the alleged plan to commit the crime and Mancao repeatedly admitted such innocence in several talks in the U.S. with Dumlao.
Being robbed of something valuable causes us pain and anguish. But when that “something” is our personal or family’s honor, it causes terrible pain and extreme anguish. Our brother may not be in jail right now, but we can feel his suffering. Mental and emotional suffering is worse than physical pain. Being away from home and from loved ones is one of the worst situations to be in. Our wish is for our brother to spend a quiet Christmas dinner with us, like what most Filipinos do, at home.
A friend sent this message: “From dark clouds, we get precious water. From dark mines, we get valuable jewels. And from our darkest trials come our best blessings from God.” This we believe in. We believe that justice and truth will ultimately prevail in God’s own time. Until then, we would like to express our gratitude to those who understand and sympathize with us.
THE FAMILY OF PING LACSON
(Sgd)
Romulo Lacson Feliciano Lacson Reynaldo Lacson
Juanito Lacson Ma. Corazon Lacson-Magpayo
Ernani Lacson Ma. Cristina Lacson-Diaz
In every Filipino family, two things are most treasured: honor and home.
Our brother, Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson is accused of masterminding the murder of Salvador “Bubby” Dacer and his driver. The principal evidence against him that the previous administration’s DOJ investigating panel and the court considered “probable cause” was an affidavit by a lone witness, Cesar Mancao. In that affidavit, Mancao narrated a supposed conversation inside a car between Ping and Michael Ray Aquino wherein Ping allegedly ordered Aquino to have Dacer murdered. He claimed to have overheard the conversation while seated at the front seat of the car next to Ping’s driver, Reynaldo Oximoso, while Ping and Aquino were at the backseat.
To establish “probable cause”, the investigators and the judge must find the evidence credible. It must lead a reasonable person to believe that the person being accused committed a crime.
We believe that a careful consideration of the following facts will lead reasonable person to a conclusion that Mancao’s allegation in his affidavit was a fabrication and an absolute lie:
1. Oximoso denied in a sworn affidavit submitted to the court that such conversation or car ride ever happened. He explained that during the whole period that he served as Ping’s security aide-driver, the front seat was always reserved for the Aide de Camp. Therefore, Mancao’s claim that he occupied the front seat is not true. Oximoso also said that there was never a time that Ping, Aquino and Mancao rode together in a car during that period. Likewise, Aquino, in a sworn affidavit subscribed before a Philippine consul in the United States, denied having been in the same car as Ping and Mancao during the time that he was serving as PAOCTF Operations Division Chief, or having any conversation with Ping regarding any order or plan to liquidate or eliminate Dacer. He categorically denied ever receiving any order from Senator Lacson to liquidate any person, including a certain “Bero” or “Delta.”
2. Mancao unwittingly proved his own affidavit to be a fabrication and a lie. His sworn affidavit indicated that the alleged car conversation took place “sometime in October, 2000”. He clarified in a hearing for his petition to become a state witness that the car conversation took place “sometime in September, 2000 or early October, 2000”. He clarified that he could remember it very well because it happened during the time that then Pres. Estrada was out of the country. He made such clarification spontaneously upon direct examination conducted by DOJ prosecutor Hazel Valdez. He did so, however, oblivious to the fact as sworn to by Sen. Mar Roxas and Usec. Mike Toledo that at the time President Estrada was abroad and hence when the car conversation supposedly happened, Ping was with President Estrada, Usec. Toledo and Senator Mar Roxas on an official visit to the United States. Incidentally, DOJ prosecutor Hazel Valdez was part of the DOJ panel that drafted Mancao’s February 14, 2009 affidavit while both were in the U.S. Thereafter, Mancao was sworn to his affidavit in his U.S. detention cell by the Philippine consul on a weekend, accompanied by DOJ Prosecutor Valdez.
3. That Mancao’s affidavit was a fabrication is further bolstered by the fact that several months prior to its signing, Mancao who was in the United States at the time, was interviewed over radio station DZMM and over Channel 7. He freely talked about being contacted by Gen. Romeo Prestoza, then presidential security chief in Malacanang. He narrated in both interviews that Prestoza wanted him to implicate Ping in the Dacer murder case and in exchange, he would be discharged as accused and he would be relocated with his family to Singapore, all expense paid. Is it a far-fetched conclusion that when threatened with extradition and being charged in this murder case; Mancao chose the easy way out by agreeing to become a state “witness”?
4. Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the car conversation actually happened, Mancao admitted in a court hearing that he being seated at the front seat of the car with Ping and Aquino at the back seat, he was not at all certain what he actually heard.
5. On top of this is the testimony of Glenn Dumlao, who executed several affidavits attesting to Ping’s innocence of the crime. In one of his affidavits, he narrated how officials of the previous administration tortured him physically, mentally and emotionally so that he would implicate Ping, but he held on to the truth.
In spite of very weak evidence to support its case, the previous DOJ filed the complaint. The court issued a warrant for Ping’s arrest during the closing stage of the previous administration whose corrupt ways he exposed in many privilege speeches.
In an effort to strengthen a very weak case against Ping, the previous DOJ even cited a letter from Dacer to Estrada maligning Ping without submitting any proof that Ping knew about that letter. Another frequently told story is that Dacer allegedly told his daughters that if something happened to him, Ping was to blame. If these allegations proved anything, it is the fact that the case filed against Ping extremely suffers from lack of evidence to establish probable cause.
In our last Christmas together, Ping already told us of frantic moves of the previous administration to have an arrest warrant against him. He told us to take comfort in the fact that he had nothing to do with that crime.
Before the warrant for his arrest came out, Ping decided to become inaccessible. That was his personal decision. We understand that it had nothing to do with guilt or cowardice. He had enough information to base it on. For one, he knew then that the RTC judge was an applicant for promotion to the Court of Appeals. An evil trap was set by a perceived corrupt administration and it was about to be sprung on him.
Subsequent events validated his belief. On Friday, February 5, 2010, the RTC judge issued a warrant of arrest against him. On Monday, February 8, 2010 the Judicial and Bar Council recommended the judge to President Arroyo and she was promoted to the Court of Appeals one month later.
Ping became unreachable to avoid being a victim of an evil conspiracy to put him away because of his anti-graft and corruption crusade. Self-preservation is a natural human instinct. He did not regard letting evil triumph as an act of decency.
A person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. But with a non-bailable crime like murder, the reality is that punishment comes before conviction. The accused suffers in jail while a court trial is ongoing to prove his guilt or innocence. Our Constitution says that the right to bail can be denied when the evidence of guilt is strong. In the case filed against Ping, the evidence is not only weak; it is fabricated. Just one affidavit with a conflicting story by a witness of doubtful credibility against multiple exonerating affidavits and statements, including two previously made by the accusing witness (Mancao) is why we say it is.
Therefore, we are extremely puzzled why DOJ Secretary Delima continues to ignore calls for a reinvestigation of this case. According to the DOJ secretary’s interviews, she is waiting for additional evidence to start such a reinvestigation. If the foregoing facts are not enough, we do not know what else would justify a reinvestigation. We can only guess that public prosecutors at the DOJ who had a hand in filing this case are giving her the wrong counsel.
1. Setting legal technicalities and prejudgment aside, is it not common sense to give more weight to the testimony of three people against the uncorroborated account of one “witness”? That lone witness even admitted in court that he was not at all certain about what he heard. He freely said in two separate interviews with media months before that he was being enticed by the previous administration to implicate the senator in exchange for a comfortable life. Out of four alleged passengers in the car where the “incriminating” conversation supposedly happened, three have sworn that it never happened. Why give so much weight to Mancao’s affidavit and disregard Dumlao’s affidavit which contains vivid details of how he was tortured and threatened so that he would implicate Ping in the murder case?
2. Again, for the sake of argument and assuming that Mancao’s story is true, the invented conversation in the car referred to a certain “Bigote” as the mastermind for killing Dacer. Rather than trying to determine the true identity of “Bigote”, why did the previous DOJ instead charge Ping as mastermind? Is this not a tell-tale sign of a concerted effort to put him in jail?
3. Finally, is the physical impossibility of Ping who was travelling in the U.S. to be riding in a car to Greenhills with Mancao and Aquino not enough to deem Mancao’s affidavit as nothing but imaginary trash?
4. The most compelling proof that Mancao’s affidavit is a pure fabrication comes from Mancao himself. In a statement filed by his lawyer with the court, he declared that “he only learned of the sordid affair ex post facto” (after the fact). He is in reality being consistent with the affidavit that Dumlao testified to: Mancao knew nothing about the alleged plan to commit the crime and Mancao repeatedly admitted such innocence in several talks in the U.S. with Dumlao.
Being robbed of something valuable causes us pain and anguish. But when that “something” is our personal or family’s honor, it causes terrible pain and extreme anguish. Our brother may not be in jail right now, but we can feel his suffering. Mental and emotional suffering is worse than physical pain. Being away from home and from loved ones is one of the worst situations to be in. Our wish is for our brother to spend a quiet Christmas dinner with us, like what most Filipinos do, at home.
A friend sent this message: “From dark clouds, we get precious water. From dark mines, we get valuable jewels. And from our darkest trials come our best blessings from God.” This we believe in. We believe that justice and truth will ultimately prevail in God’s own time. Until then, we would like to express our gratitude to those who understand and sympathize with us.
THE FAMILY OF PING LACSON
(Sgd)
Romulo Lacson Feliciano Lacson Reynaldo Lacson
Juanito Lacson Ma. Corazon Lacson-Magpayo
Ernani Lacson Ma. Cristina Lacson-Diaz
Friday, December 3, 2010
Obedience To The Law
"The true is only the expedient in the way of our thinking, just as the right is only the expedient in the way of our thinking." - William James.
Senator Ping Lacson released a statement to the press that the only way he will come out is when "justice is served right" or "when I'm dead."
These are very strong words from the so called "fugitive senator".
The reaction from Secretary of Justice Delima was a curt "Senator Lacson's status does not give him the privilege of dictating the terms of his surrender."
That is the secretary's point of view. The senator was not "dictating" the terms of his surrender. He was "expressing" it.
Being charged of a crime he swears he had nothing to do with on the basis of a single witness's sworn affidavit which was shown to be inconsistent in so many ways and contradicted by three other witnesses, not being allowed to present other pieces of evidence before the DOJ panel, seeing that the DOJ panel had been very selective in quoting portions of affidavits to incriminate him - Senator Lacson can not be blamed for thinking and feeling the way he did. What the DOJ called "probable cause" can not even stand the test of logic.
In his view, he could not dignify what he sees as persecution by the previous administration in implicating him to this crime of murder, a non-bailable offense, and would therefore land him in jail until he proves his innocence in court.
"Innocent until proven guilty" - that is the legal maxim. But in this case, "Incarcerated until proven innocent."
There are many people calling for the senator's surrender. Many are well-meaning, others not.
In this instance, there is no right or wrong. It is a personal principle and a personal choice on the part of the accused.
Senator Ping Lacson released a statement to the press that the only way he will come out is when "justice is served right" or "when I'm dead."
These are very strong words from the so called "fugitive senator".
The reaction from Secretary of Justice Delima was a curt "Senator Lacson's status does not give him the privilege of dictating the terms of his surrender."
That is the secretary's point of view. The senator was not "dictating" the terms of his surrender. He was "expressing" it.
Being charged of a crime he swears he had nothing to do with on the basis of a single witness's sworn affidavit which was shown to be inconsistent in so many ways and contradicted by three other witnesses, not being allowed to present other pieces of evidence before the DOJ panel, seeing that the DOJ panel had been very selective in quoting portions of affidavits to incriminate him - Senator Lacson can not be blamed for thinking and feeling the way he did. What the DOJ called "probable cause" can not even stand the test of logic.
In his view, he could not dignify what he sees as persecution by the previous administration in implicating him to this crime of murder, a non-bailable offense, and would therefore land him in jail until he proves his innocence in court.
"Innocent until proven guilty" - that is the legal maxim. But in this case, "Incarcerated until proven innocent."
There are many people calling for the senator's surrender. Many are well-meaning, others not.
In this instance, there is no right or wrong. It is a personal principle and a personal choice on the part of the accused.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)