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 Testimonies of the witnesses presented by the prosecution, notably P/Insp. Rogelio Castillo and SPO2 Jose Garcia, Jr. do not tie up on material details pertaining to the alleged taking of Joel de Jesus’ purported extra-judicial confessions. Rogelio Castillo said that they went to the City Hall Compound at around 1:00 p.m. on June 20, 1996 to look for a lawyer who could assist Joel de Jesus in the execution of the latter’s extra-judicial confession. Castillo testified that his men scouted for lawyers and he was left at the lobby. (TSN, August 15, 1996, p. 130). SPO2 Jose Garcia, on the other hand, testified that when they arrived at the City Hall, it was Lt. Rogelio Castillo and another investigator who went to the second floor to look for a lawyer. (TSN, September 25, 1996, pp. 63-66). And that he, together with Joel de Jesus and SPO1 Nicanor was left at the lobby. (ibid., p. 76). These witnesses also testified that they arrived at the City Hall Compound at about 1:00 p.m. (TSN, August 15, 1996, p. 129), that they had to scout for lawyers for about 15-20 minutes according to Castillo (TSN, August 15, 1996, p. 130) while according to Garcia it took them about 25-30 minutes to look for a lawyer (TSN, September 25, pp. 64-65), that when they arrived at the IBP Office, Atty. Confesor Sansano was not yet around so they had to wait for another 5-7 minutes according to Garcia (TSN, October 1, 1996, p. 46) while according to Castillo they had to wait for about 15-20 minutes (TSN, August 15, 1996, p. 135), that Atty. Sansano talked with Joel de Jesus for about five minutes according to Garcia (September 25, 1996, p. 127) while Castillo testified that Atty. Sansano conferred with Joel for about 30 minutes (TSN, August 15, 1996, p. 149). Comparing the testimonies of Castillo and Garcia as to the time elapsed for each of the significant details they testified to we get the following: Time Elapsed Event Castillo Garcia Scouting for a lawyer 15 – 20 min. 25 – 30 min. Waiting for Atty. Sansano to arrive 15 – 20 min. 5 – 7 min. Atty. Sansano’s conference with Joel de 30 min. Jesus 5 min. Page 82 of 127 82
APPELLANTS’ BRIEF People of the Philippines vs. Fortuna, et. al. S. C. G. R. No. 141660-64 TOTAL TIME ELAPSED from their arrival at City Hall to start of taking Joel de Jesus’ statement. 1 hour to 1 hour and 10 minutes 35 to 42 minutes The document evidencing the alleged extra-judicial confession of Joel de Jesus states that the statement was taken from 1:10 p.m. Taking the time frame according to the two witnesses, it would have been impossible to start the taking of Joel’s statement at 1:10 p.m. If we use Castillo’s testimony, the probable start of taking Joel’s statement would have been 2:00 or 2:10 p.m. while if we use Garcia’s testimony, it should have started at 1:35 or 1:42 p.m. This is nowhere near the 1:10 p.m. written on the heading of Joel de Jesus’ statement in question. We have also pointed out earlier that the taking of the statement was allegedly finished at 5:55 p.m. as appearing in the document itself and as confirmed by the police officers. Yet, Joel de Jesus signed the document at exactly 5:00 p.m. How can this happen that a document was signed 55 minutes prior to its completion? Such inconsistencies indicate falsity in the assertions being forwarded by the prosecution that the purported taking of the extra-judicial confessions of Joel de Jesus and Lorenzo delos Santos allegedly at the IBP Office in Quezon City Hall ever really happened. 3. Certain facts presented by the prosecution itself establish that Joel de Jesus was interrogated by the police investigators right after his arrest, without the assistance of counsel, and indicate that the alleged interrogation of Joel de Jesus at the IBP Office did not actually take place. Moreover, certain facts advanced by the prosecution itself support the testimonies of Joel de Jesus and Lorenzo delos Santos that their Constitutional rights to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsels were violated. Police Sr. Inspector Jose B. Macanas, witness for the prosecution, testified as to the particulars of the arrest of Joel de Jesus, Cesar Fortuna and Lorenzo delos Santos. Page 83 of 127 83
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: APPELLANTS’ BRIEF People of the P
Page 81: APPELLANTS’ BRIEF People of the P
Page 127: APPELLANTS’ BRIEF People of the P
show all

Republic of the Philippines - Campaign

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?