<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: draft 2008 CA ruling acquits smith</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stuartsantiago.com/draft-2008-ca-ruling-acquits-smith/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/draft-2008-ca-ruling-acquits-smith/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 12:38:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: smith walks free</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/draft-2008-ca-ruling-acquits-smith/#comment-1237</link>
		<dc:creator>smith walks free</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:22:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=899#comment-1237</guid>
		<description>[...] when the supreme court was ordering the court of appeals to investigate in 90 days the leak of a draft decision acquitting smith, sabay order smith&#8217;s lawyer to explain in 10 days why nicole&#8217;s [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] when the supreme court was ordering the court of appeals to investigate in 90 days the leak of a draft decision acquitting smith, sabay order smith&#8217;s lawyer to explain in 10 days why nicole&#8217;s [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: angela</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/draft-2008-ca-ruling-acquits-smith/#comment-1236</link>
		<dc:creator>angela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2009 04:03:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=899#comment-1236</guid>
		<description>hey djb ;)  re RA 8505 oo nga, this right to privacy for both the victim and the accused has been largely ignored, for nicole just lately, and for smith from the beginning pa of the case.  i wonder why smith&#039;s lawyers didn&#039;t do anything to protect their client.  as for nicole, it&#039;s not naman the lynch mob lang that has been violating this law, unless you count most of media and the blogosphere as part of the lynch mob.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hey djb ;)  re RA 8505 oo nga, this right to privacy for both the victim and the accused has been largely ignored, for nicole just lately, and for smith from the beginning pa of the case.  i wonder why smith&#8217;s lawyers didn&#8217;t do anything to protect their client.  as for nicole, it&#8217;s not naman the lynch mob lang that has been violating this law, unless you count most of media and the blogosphere as part of the lynch mob.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: djb</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/draft-2008-ca-ruling-acquits-smith/#comment-1235</link>
		<dc:creator>djb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:50:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=899#comment-1235</guid>
		<description>angela,
when the case is finally settled there will be many lessons to learn, among them the following of special interest to you from the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1998/ra_8505_1998.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Rape Victim Assistance Act, RA 8505,&lt;/a&gt; much referred to by lawyers Ursua and Legarda:

&lt;blockquote&gt;    

    Section 5. Protective Measures. - At any stage of the investigation, prosecution and trial of a complaint for rape, the police officer, the prosecutor, the court and its officers, as well as the parties to the complaint shall recognize the right to privacy &lt;b&gt;of the offended party and the accused.&lt;/b&gt; Towards this end, the police officer, prosecutor, or the court to whom the complaint has been referred may, whenever necessary to ensure fair and impartial proceedings, and after considering all circumstances for the best interest of the parties, order a closed-door investigation, prosecution or trial and that &lt;b&gt;the name and personal circumstances of the offended party and/or the accused, or any other information tending to establish their identities, and such circumstances or information on the complaint shall not be disclosed to the public.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

what the Lynch Mobs have been doing, led by Nicole&#039;s lawyers, the media and Gabriela, are wanton violations of this law, and the disingenuous hiding of this truth by them is a continuing crime against common human decency.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>angela,<br />
when the case is finally settled there will be many lessons to learn, among them the following of special interest to you from the <a href="http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1998/ra_8505_1998.html" rel="nofollow">Rape Victim Assistance Act, RA 8505,</a> much referred to by lawyers Ursua and Legarda:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>    Section 5. Protective Measures. &#8211; At any stage of the investigation, prosecution and trial of a complaint for rape, the police officer, the prosecutor, the court and its officers, as well as the parties to the complaint shall recognize the right to privacy <b>of the offended party and the accused.</b> Towards this end, the police officer, prosecutor, or the court to whom the complaint has been referred may, whenever necessary to ensure fair and impartial proceedings, and after considering all circumstances for the best interest of the parties, order a closed-door investigation, prosecution or trial and that <b>the name and personal circumstances of the offended party and/or the accused, or any other information tending to establish their identities, and such circumstances or information on the complaint shall not be disclosed to the public.</b></p></blockquote>
<p>what the Lynch Mobs have been doing, led by Nicole&#8217;s lawyers, the media and Gabriela, are wanton violations of this law, and the disingenuous hiding of this truth by them is a continuing crime against common human decency.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pedestrian Observer GB</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/draft-2008-ca-ruling-acquits-smith/#comment-1234</link>
		<dc:creator>Pedestrian Observer GB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:21:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=899#comment-1234</guid>
		<description>hahaha, I guess Dizon belongs to the club of cross eyed no I take that back but the club of delusional people seeing things differently from what actually took place.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hahaha, I guess Dizon belongs to the club of cross eyed no I take that back but the club of delusional people seeing things differently from what actually took place.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: angela</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/draft-2008-ca-ruling-acquits-smith/#comment-1233</link>
		<dc:creator>angela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 03:01:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=899#comment-1233</guid>
		<description>yikes talaga, pogb ;) also, where did he get this?  &quot;He said that the use of force applied to Nicole was not apparent because she herself went to the vehicle voluntarily.&quot;  this is testimony from the smith camp, ignoring that of witnesses who saw smith carrying her out of the club.

and this:  &quot;Dizon wrote that Nicole was not deprived of reason after all, since she was aware of the details surrounding the crime because at that exact moment she was drunk but not totally unconscious&quot;  tells me dizon has never been drunk and doesn&#039;t know what he&#039;s talking about.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yikes talaga, pogb ;) also, where did he get this?  &#8220;He said that the use of force applied to Nicole was not apparent because she herself went to the vehicle voluntarily.&#8221;  this is testimony from the smith camp, ignoring that of witnesses who saw smith carrying her out of the club.</p>
<p>and this:  &#8220;Dizon wrote that Nicole was not deprived of reason after all, since she was aware of the details surrounding the crime because at that exact moment she was drunk but not totally unconscious&#8221;  tells me dizon has never been drunk and doesn&#8217;t know what he&#8217;s talking about.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pedestrian Observer GB</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/draft-2008-ca-ruling-acquits-smith/#comment-1232</link>
		<dc:creator>Pedestrian Observer GB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 01:22:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=899#comment-1232</guid>
		<description>Yikes, so if they decided this is the way to go it only mean one thing..... the lawyer/s of Nicole are to be blamed for messing up the complaint.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yikes, so if they decided this is the way to go it only mean one thing&#8230;.. the lawyer/s of Nicole are to be blamed for messing up the complaint.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

