Republic of the Philippines - Campaign

More documents

Recommendations

Info

APPELLANTS’ BRIEF People of the Philippines vs. Fortuna, et. al. S. C. G. R. No. 141660-64 7. several police investigation reports showing the ABB angle in the Abadilla, Ty and de Dios killings (and possibly in still unavailable police and military intelligence reports) Relevant to all these is the Supreme Court Decision in the case of the ambush- killing of U.S. Col. James N. Rowe, People vs. Continente and Itaas (G.R. Nos. 100801- 02, August 25, 2000) where for the first time there is judicial notice of the ABB. In the case at bar, one of the indications of the ABB angle submitted was the Philippine Army Commanding General’s Press Statement in October 1997 attributing to the ABB both the Rowe and Abadilla killings, among others (see Annex 3 of the accused Lumanog’s “Supplement to the Motion for Reconsideration” dated 25 November 1999 in the RTC). As for the news reports, these are not entirely worthless as “hearsay evidence”. These can also be considered as basis for “judicial notice of matters which are of public knowledge” (Rules of Court, Rule 129, Sec. 2). And as leads to secure witnesses and other evidence, including by a compulsory process. For example, the news report featuring the June 27, 1996 interview of ABB head Sergio Romero by then Skycable News Manager David Celdran wherein Romero reiterated ABB responsibility for the Abadilla killing and exonerated the accused (Annex 6 of the abovesaid Memorandum) was a lead for the subpoena, if necessary, of Celdran to testify thereon if introduction of additional evidence were to be allowed. At this juncture, we have to make reference to the Supreme Court en banc Decision of March 2, 2001 in Estrada vs. Desierto, et al. (G.R. Nos. 146710-15) and Estrada vs. Macapagal-Arroyo (G.R. No. 146738) upholding the constitutionality of the assumption to office of the new President, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Of 135 footnotes in the Decision, 40 (30 percent) were taken from the Philippine Daily Inquirer, 12 (9 percent) from the Philippine Star, 2 (1 percent) from the Manila Bulletin, and 1 (0.7 percent) from the Manila Standard. No less than the Supreme Court has relied on newspapers when the life of the nation was at stake. (In the case at bar, it is the lives of five men at stake.) Page 114 of 127 114
APPELLANTS’ BRIEF People of the Philippines vs. Fortuna, et. al. S. C. G. R. No. 141660-64 It turns out that the trial court itself actually relies on news reports, as shown in another passage of the appealed Order dated January 25, 2000 (p. 4, second par.): “…as surely as she have (sic) seen on t.v., as she claimed, and also on the morning papers the faces of all the accused…” In an earlier passage (p. 3, fifth par.), the trial court referred to “ the time when the ambush-slay of the victim as well as the arrest of the then suspects (including Joel) was the talk of the town.” And that was because of news reports and other media coverage. The trial court is, therefore, estopped from denigrating news reports as “hearsay and not admissible in evidence.” Media interviews where interviewees freely, voluntarily and spontaneously make admissions or confessions are admissible in evidence, as ruled in the recent death penalty case of Pablito Andan (People vs. Andan, 269 SCRA 95; see also People vs. Vizcarra, 115 SCRA 743). If such evidence can be admitted against the declarant to the point of making him liable by death penalty, with more reason can such evidence be admitted to save innocent accused from the death penalty. Such declarations against penal interest have also been considered exceptions to the hearsay rule and thus admissible to exculpate the accused. The best exposition on this is Philippine jurisprudence was in a decision by the great Justice Malcolm: Any man outside of a court and unhampered by the pressure of technical procedure, unreasoned rules of evidence, and cumulative authority, would say that if a man deliberately acknowledged himself to be the perpetrator of a crime and exonerated the person charged with the crime, and there was other evidence indicative of the truthfulness of the statement, the accused man should not be permitted to go to prison or to the electric chair to expiate a crime he never committed. Shall judges trained and experienced in the law display less discerning common sense than the layman and allow precedent to overcome truth. 23 (italics supplied) 23 People vs. Toledo and Holgado (51 Phils. 825, 839) which has a number of other passages relevant to the case at bar, including quoted paragraphs from Professor Gilmore’s classic Book on Evidence. See also People vs. Surio (56 Phil. 774) and People vs. Caparas (102 Phil. 787). Page 115 of 127 115
Page 1 and 2:
Republic of the Philippines SUPREME
Page 3 and 4:
APPELLANTS’ BRIEF People of the P
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64: APPELLANTS’ BRIEF People of the P
Page 113: APPELLANTS’ BRIEF People of the P
Page 127: APPELLANTS’ BRIEF People of the P
show all

Republic of the Philippines - Campaign

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?