Republic of the Philippines - Campaign

APPELLANTS’ BRIEF
People of the Philippines vs. Fortuna, et. al.
S. C. G. R. No. 141660-64
whom the witness referred to in his sworn statement given to police investigators just five
hours after the incident?
There were only four suspects seen by all the eyewitnesses who were investigated
by the police. These four suspects must necessarily be those who were seen by all the
witnesses around the victim’s car: one at the driver’s side (front left); another near the
passenger’s side (front right), another at the rear right side of the car and the fourth at the
car’s rear left side. For Joel de Jesus to be at the crime scene, he must be among these
four suspects around the car.
Freddie Alejo, in open court, pointed to Rameses de Jesus, Cesar Fortuna, Lenido
Lumanog and Augusto Santos as those whom he allegedly saw around the victim’s car.
This alone, already points to the fact that Joel de Jesus was not among those who were
seen at the crime scene on the very day the crime was perpetrated.
Add to this the fact that the two men allegedly walking to and fro in front of the
guardhouse where Alejo was stationed were just added belatedly in Alejo’s testimony and
were never touched upon in his earlier salaysay.
Comparing his testimony in open court and his earlier sworn statement, the
reliability of the sworn statement is greater considering that it was given just five hours
before the incident happened. In the words of the trial court itself,
The shooting incident at bench took place around 8:40 in
the morning. By 9:00 a.m., policemen were already swarming in
the crime scene interviewing likely witnesses including SG
Alejo. In the process SG Alejo must have been repeatedly telling
(alone of with others) various persons – police and civilian alike
– his observations on what happened that morning. The
typewriter recording at 1:55 noon of SG Alejo’s salaysay is but
the culmination of a long process of oral interviews and
conversation so that the results thereof can be put in systematic
order. Additionally, at that period in time, SG Alejo’s
recollection is still very recent and fresh and he appears to be
solely in touch with police investigators who came to know of
the ambush that same morning. His court testimony, therefore,
given at a much later date (August 1996) after the arrest of
Lorenzo delos Santos wherein SG Alejo narrated that there were
two (2) men loitering about near his post and that one after the
other those two men barked at or ordered him is weakened by
what he had earlier told police investigators disclosing that only
one (1) person shouted orders to him. In view of this, the court
finds the alibi of Lorenzo to have been correspondingly
Page 60 of 127
60