Can Janet Lim Napoles be state witness?

[ohohoy]

---

Businesswoman Janet Lim Napoles should not be allowed to escape prosecution by turning state witness, Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago said.

The biggest hurdle in any move to bring Napoles to the witness stand, Santiago said, would be proving that she is not the most guilty in the pork barrel scam.

Napoles will find it extremely difficult to prove her claim that she is not the most guilty, said the senator, who is a former regional trial court judge.

My fellow istoryan's what can you say?

[TristanE]

The applicable law on this issue is Section 17, Rule 119 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure which provides that the court may direct the accused to be discharged so that they may be witnesses for the state when accused does not appear to be the most guilty;

Here's what Atty. Raymond Fortun had to say about this issue (this is a quote from his FB page):

Janet Napoles CANNOT become a state witness because SHE IS THE MOST GUILTY. She is most guilty because she had the most to gain from the pork barrel scandal.

To illustrate:

Let's assume there are 23 congressmen who dealt with Napoles. Assuming that each congressman turned over their entire Php70Million to Napoles's bogus NGO's, and the "deal" was that each congressman would get 70% (with Napoles getting 30%), each congressman would get Php49Million (70% of 70M). On the other hand, Napoles would stand to gain a grand total of Php483Million (30% of 70M x 23 congressmen). Do the math -- Php49M as against Php483M. Who benefited the most?

In the concept of a grand conspiracy, it is highly unlikely that 23 congressmen from various districts all over the Philippines (including party lists) would get together and instruct Napoles to set up bogus NGO's so that they can all get 70% of their pork barrel allocation. Rather, it is easier to surmise that NAPOLES separately approached 23 congressmen, told them of her scheme to use bogus NGO's to extract the congressmen's pork barrel allocations under a 70-30 sharing arrangement. Under the latter scenario, it is NAPOLES who masterminded the entire scam, with the congressmen being the greedy and willing participants thereto. Suffice it to state that the mastermind CANNOT become a state witness; the mastermind is the MOST GUILTY.

You could, however, argue that the government could skirt this technical rule, when national or public interest demands that we need to determine which of our public officials are involved or at least had knowledge of Napoles' scheme so we could charge them with violation/s of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practice Act.

[amingb]

Ana diay na .. ug mao ni istoriaha daghan maluwas ani nga mga Kawatan ... dili naman na mo sulti sa tinood si Napoles ... maau ani pamutlan ug liog na siguro.

[bleedingboi]

I think pwede. Considering she needs to meet the following requirements:

-There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is requested

-There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense committed, except the testimony of the accused

- The testimony of the accused can be substantially corroborated in its material points

-The accused has not at any time been investigated of any offense involving moral turpitude

Napoles can't turn state witness, Santiago says

[sizzlingROBOT]

It depends on PNOY's decision.

[reptoid]

I have a feeling that she's going to have an accident in the near future. Perhaps she thought that coming out in the open would make her safer, me... I'm not so convinced about that. She is a big fish for sure, but she represents just the tip of the iceberg. The rich and powerful who have routinely abused the system for years will not go down without a fight and they have a long reach.

[adrianna]

sa ako lang analysis, pwede pud siya ma state witness. suma sa balaod, evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically form part of the trial. If the court denies the motion for discharge of the accused as state witness, his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence. so, masayang iyang testimony if e-deny siya sa court. on the other hand, she appears to be the most guilty man pud. if ang testimony sa 10 whistleblowers enough na para mu convict sa mga crocs, Napoles' testimony would not be indispensable in the case.

[rans23]

ngano e state witness man intawon ng kriminal oy. lifetime imprisonment unta angay ana niya sampol sa mga sumusunod ba, kung kana tinood gyud nga wagtangon na nilang corruption.

[kit_cebu]

It depends on PNOY's decision.

apparently, probably her surrender was PNOY's decision too...
- turning her to state witness
- grilled by her co-conspirators in the senate hearing...which would make this a REAL "It's more fun in the Philippines" where you are one of the suspects AND you are one of the judges/jury...
- making PNOY's "my husband's lover", Mar Roxas, into a presidentiable by 2016

this is a joke...which only the thinking people will get...and the Binay/Bam supporters will take it as a VICTORY...

- - - Updated - - -

lifetime imprisonment unta angay

nindot tagod-tagoron from toenail going up...using a surgical scalpel missing the vital parts para buhi ra siya...
and this should include ALL the guilty...

[Renz8]

She can be provided she will spill the Beans on all Senators&Congressmen she dealt with............