mike’s defense

so what’s mike defensor up to, dredging up the rot of the nbn-zte-fg deal that saw (alleged fixer) ben abalos resign as comelec chief and the project stopped in its tracks.   natabunan na nga ng walang katapusang iba’t ibang atraso at iskandalo ng arroyo govt, dapat ay nagsasaya na lang si mike, jun lozada’s camp was rather quiet, tila lusot na ang mag-asawang arroyo — thanks to romy neri, let’s not forget — at tila okey na lang sa bayan na hintayin ang 2010, malapit na naman, after all.   goodbye gloria, no immunity from suit.

so why?   i don’t buy mike’s spin that it’s just a perjury issue, nothing political daw, he just wants to clear his name.   josko.   eh walang kalatoylatoy ang inihain niyang kaso.

In his complaint for perjury, Defensor said Lozada had given conflicting versions of their conversation:

“Mr. Lozada’s testimony before the Senate significantly deviated from what he gave before the Court of Appeals. In the Senate, he stated that I asked him to deny that he was kidnapped; in the [appellate court] however, he said I asked him to deny any knowledge about the NBN-ZTE deal.

“The statement of Mr. Lozada before the Senate and the appellate court are clearly contradictory and cannot be reconciled. After validating the completeness of my story before the Senate, Mr. Lozada cannot thereafter change its tenor in the court hearing without being held liable for perjury.”

But on Nov. 14, 2008, Judge Jorge Emmanuel Lorredo of the Manila Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC) Branch 26 found no inconsistency on Lozada’s part and dismissed Defensor’s complaint.

In his ruling, Lorredo said: “In the second and third statements [at the Court of Appeals], Lozada was given the impression that if he does not stop, there will be a demolition job against him.

“The Court notes that even in [his Senate testimony], Mike Defensor also said ‘Tapusin na natin ‘to.’ To the Court, that shows the intention of Mike Defensor to put an end to all these things about the ZTE deal …”

well, mike is so lakas, a manila regional trial court obligingly reversed the decision.

Manila RTC Branch 11 Presiding Judge Cicero Jurado Jr. reversed Lorredo’s decision on March 19, upon Defensor’s appeal through his counsel, the Fortun Narvasa lawfirm.

Jurado said the MTC went “a notch above” the requirement for determining probable cause and seemed to have already rendered a verdict without conducting a trial when it concluded that an element of the offense was absent.

He said the question at hand was whether there was evidence showing that a crime had more likely been committed and the accused should be placed under custody.

it is quite conceivable to me that in that conversation between mike and jun, a lot more was said, including both statements mike takes issue with.    and neither is illogical in the context of the other, so what’s the fuss?

obviously naghanap lang ng dahilan to get lozada out of the hands of the religious / civil society and into the hands of the judiciary, where the arroyo admin has some influence (from the lowest to the highest courts) as we can see.   and, really, it has to be connected with jun lozada being urged to run for the senate in 2010.   may panalo kasi (inggit si mike), so the idea is to neutralize him early, let him run from jail, let him serve from jail?    trillanes shows the way?

if mike really wants to clear his name for the sake of his children, it’s simple: withdraw his support from the arroyo administration.   fat chance, yes, but that would wipe the slate clean.

screwed by manangs

read ricky carandang’s screwed and manuel buencamino’s “manangs” acquit a rapist.   my sentiments exactly.   what a huge setback for the women’s fight against sexist politics.   biglang we’re back to the dark ages when women were seen as sex objects incapable of saying no except when playing hard-to-get for extra favors.   biglang we’re back to the old biases and stereotypes, among them that girls who don’t behave with strict decorum, who dress to look ‘n feel good, who drink alcohol, dance dirty, flirt mightily in public, who just wanna have fun, are asking for rape.   wtf.   where are these women justices coming from?  opus dei?   catholic women’s league?  what books are they reading?   mills & boon?   barbara cartland?

read too rina jimenez-david who calls them “maiden aunts” and patricia evangelista who calls them “virtuous ladies”.   which set me wondering, teka, baka naman mga old maid nga ang “learned ladies” na ito of the court of appeals, and so maybe they don’t know any better about men and sex and rape, and quite possibly they’ve never been drunk in their lives?   so i googled them all, only to find that all three are wives and mothers, and maybe grandmothers, wow, good luck na lang sa karma.

both justice monina arevalo zenarosa and justice myrna dimaranan vidal were born in 1939.   zenarosa took up law in ust and feu, vidal in feu.  both are turning 70 and retiring this year.    hmm, formative years right smack during the japanese occupation and the liberation.   general douglas macarthur must be one of their icons.

justice remedios salazar fernando is a different story.   born in 1953, studied law in ateneo, so far she has been quite popular with post-EDSA administrations and has been having quite a rising career.

She was named Chairman of the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board in July 1987 where she concurrently held directorship posts at the Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA)and the Office of Transport Cooperatives. In the latter part of 1991, she held the position of Officer-in-Charge/Assistant Secretary of the Land Transportation Office in a concurrent capacity.

In 1992, she was appointed Commissioner of the COMELEC. On May 21, 1999, she was appointed Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals, being one of the youngest to have been appointed to the position. She received several awards from both private and public sectors, such as Ten Outstanding Young Men given by the Jerry Roxas Foundation, Most Outstanding Capampangan, Woman of Distinction Award by the Soroptimist International, etc. When she retired from the COMELEC, she received an Award for Outstanding Service from the Senate of the Philippines.

i bet she has a moist eye on the supreme court.   i suppose this subic rape case decision is in aid of that?   how sad, specially for a baby boomer whose generation birthed the women’s movement for equal rights.

by the way, if you’re one of those who don’t feel competent to judge for themselves whether what smith did to nicole was rape or not because transcripts of the trial have not been released, so you’re willing to give the three  justices the benefit of the doubt, they must know what they’re talking about, you’re taking their word for it, smith is innocent, well you might want to make tambay sa subicrapecase website’s summary of  court proceedings.   it was rape.

smith walks free

anc breaking news around 5 p.m.: u.s. marine in subic rape case acquitted.

The Court of Appeals (CA) on Thursday acquitted US Marines Lance Corporal Daniel Smith of raping a Filipina in Subic back in 2005, and ordered released immediately.

The ruling was part of the 71-page decision penned by Justice Monina Zenarosa of the CA’s Special 11th Division.

wasn’t it just a couple of days ago 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’s lawyer to explain in 10 days why nicole’s “recantation” was notarized at his lawfirm?

The Supreme Court has ordered the Court of Appeals to investigate the leak of a supposed draft decision reversing US Marine Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith’s conviction for the rape of a Filipino woman in 2005.

In a resolution, the Supreme Court First Division also ordered Smith’s lawyer, Jose Justiniano, to explain why the victim “Nicole’s” supposed recantation was notarized at the Sycip Salazar Hernandez and Gatmaitan law office, to which Justiniano belongs.

so the court of appeals no longer recognizes the authority of the supreme court?    so the court of appeals is now (as ever?) heeding a higher power?   a higher power na masyadong nagmamadali.   i wonder what the chief justice has to say to that.

and i wonder what the trade-off is for gloria.   gloria forever?   ngek.

ted in tears, ted in trouble

so why did the police behave so badly when they found out about ted failon’s wife trina?  i think because they were mad as hell that the shooting had not been immediately reported by the family or the hospital or their spies.  mahigit tatlong oras na ang nakalipas nang malaman nilang itinakbo ni ted sa ospital ang duguang si trina.  ibig sabihin, walang nag-tip sa pulis, they’re so out of the loop, ano ba yan.  siyempre, napahiya sila, and they took it out on ted and trina’s sibs and the househelp.

so why were the police so unbelieving that it was a suicide, preferring to treat everyone as a suspect?  because the crime scene had been tampered with by the time they were notified.  this is where ted has some explaining to do.  according to reports he was in the hospital for an hour or so and then he went home, i suppose, to be there for the young daughter karisma.  so had the househelp cleaned up na the bathroom by the time he got home?  or did he himself give instructions to clean up, to spare the daughter, thinking that since it was a suicide, no crime had been committed, the house was not a crime scene?

whatever actually happened, those were huge mistakes on ted’s part, not notifying the police immediately and not instructing the househelp to stay away from the bathroom (at the very least).  was it obstruction of justice?  it would seem so, but not for reasons of guilt, rather for the sake of the daughter, which should count for something.

for now i don’t believe ted killed his wife. but i can believe that trina took her own life.

i have a friend whose wife committed suicide a couple of years ago.  it was also over huge money problems that she wouldn’t share with her husband, she was supposed to know what she was doing. she also locked herself in the bathroom then slit her throat and stabbed herself several times in the chest.  it was also the husband who found her, and who removed the knife that was still buried in her chest so he became the prime suspect and was brought to court.

my friends and i were shocked and distressed.  knowing the husband as we did, we couldn’t believe he could have been so vile and violent. on the other hand, knowing his wife as we did, we couldn’t believe that the situation was so hopeless, or that she had no other way out but to die, and so violently.  in the end the forensic evidence of suicide was convincing; the court ruled that the wounds were self-inflicted, my friend was acquitted and finally allowed to grieve in peace and start over with the kids.

this trina etong case brings it all back. and only now do i see how much worse it could have been for my friend and his family had he or his wife been a public figure.  as neither was, the media were only mildly interested, and the police were  coldly professional had no axe to grind.  it helped too that my friend got himself very good lawyers.