Visconde Massacre Before and Upto Now

[RMK711]

---

ikaw sir.. naka basa ka sa kaso?

Yep, unlike you. Basig naglisod ka og basa?

[masakiton]

Asa man nang facts dai, nakabasa ka sa kaso? Ikapila na ko nangayo nimo sa facts. Basig dili ka kahibalo mo distinguish between facts og opinion. Most of the ponencia is just the opinion of the justices.. for example in their opinion the witness is not credible. Or in their opinion, the alibi evidence is highly unlikely to be fabricated. This is because the supreme court is not a trier of facts, they're not even supposed to overrule the direct observations of the trial judge regarding the believability of witness testimonies.

How often does our supreme court rely on facts. They in fact rely on palusot a lot. Is unintentional plagiarism being a defense to the plagiarism a fact or just the opinion of the justices. Because I'm pretty sure nowhere else in the world allows that defense.. so there you go. Special ang Supreme Court Pilipinas, wurag special child.. naay Down Syndrome. hahaha...

ikaw sir.. naka basa ka sa kaso?

Yep, unlike you. Basig naglisod ka og basa?

ok ra sir.. please i present ang imo mga facts/documents/evidence nga na kuha aron ma share pud imo knowledge nga equal or mas maayo pa sa SC justices

palihog i simplify para sa amo a nga based on evidence/facts/documents nga imo na basa ... ngano sayop ang SC sa ila decission

[RMK711]

I already did if you didn't see it, use the search function maam. I don't like lazies

[masakiton]

Asa man nang facts dai, nakabasa ka sa kaso? Ikapila na ko nangayo nimo sa facts. Basig dili ka kahibalo mo distinguish between facts og opinion. Most of the ponencia is just the opinion of the justices.. for example in their opinion the witness is not credible. Or in their opinion, the alibi evidence is highly unlikely to be fabricated. This is because the supreme court is not a trier of facts, they're not even supposed to overrule the direct observations of the trial judge regarding the believability of witness testimonies.

How often does our supreme court rely on facts. They in fact rely on palusot a lot. Is unintentional plagiarism being a defense to the plagiarism a fact or just the opinion of the justices. Because I'm pretty sure nowhere else in the world allows that defense.. so there you go. Special ang Supreme Court Pilipinas, wurag special child.. naay Down Syndrome. hahaha...

ikaw sir.. naka basa ka sa kaso?

Yep, unlike you. Basig naglisod ka og basa?

\

wala man koi nakita sir.. kasagaran sa imo post kai puros man sa imo gibati sa supreme court
ang supreme court naa sila facts nga gi basehan sa ila decission dili ang personal feelings

please i present ang imo mga facts/documents/evidence nga na kuha aron ma share pud imo knowledge nga equal or mas maayo pa sa SC justices

palihog i simplify para sa amo a nga based on evidence/facts/documents nga imo na basa ... ngano sayop ang SC sa ila decission

[kenites]

\

wala man koi nakita sir.. kasagaran sa imo post kai puros man sa imo gibati sa supreme court
ang supreme court naa sila facts nga gi basehan sa ila decission dili ang personal feelings

please i present ang imo mga facts/documents/evidence nga na kuha aron ma share pud imo knowledge nga equal or mas maayo pa sa SC justices

palihog i simplify para sa amo a nga based on evidence/facts/documents nga imo na basa ... ngano sayop ang SC sa ila decission

^^ Wala bitaw, puros ra man hinanakit sa SC iya mga post dire..Bro RMK pag himo ug counter arguments sa SC decision and post it here..and maybe ma convince pa mi nimo..

[RMK711]

^^ Wala bitaw, puros ra man hinanakit sa SC iya mga post dire..Bro RMK pag himo ug counter arguments sa SC decision and post it here..and maybe ma convince pa mi nimo..

Masakiton doesn't know how to use the post history or search button so that's her problem. Don't follow her example.

[masakiton]

^^ Wala bitaw, puros ra man hinanakit sa SC iya mga post dire..Bro RMK pag himo ug counter arguments sa SC decision and post it here..and maybe ma convince pa mi nimo..

dili nato pugson kung wala sir...

[behemothharr]

hayahay ang ubang accussed kay na apil sa kahig hahahaha!!!

[muddstond]

\

wala man koi nakita sir.. kasagaran sa imo post kai puros man sa imo gibati sa supreme court
ang supreme court naa sila facts nga gi basehan sa ila decission dili ang personal feelings

please i present ang imo mga facts/documents/evidence nga na kuha aron ma share pud imo knowledge nga equal or mas maayo pa sa SC justices

palihog i simplify para sa amo a nga based on evidence/facts/documents nga imo na basa ... ngano sayop ang SC sa ila decission

Unsay base sa GIBATI!!! Mao nang GIKABAHONG ug GiNuka atong Justice system kay part siguro mo nila. I agree with you RMK... Respect is to be EARNED. Dili jud ka respetuan atong Justice system kay sa History palang daan daghan bulelyaso ug palpak. Nawong kaayo ug Kwarta. All the self righteous out there, YOU ARE SOOO RIGHTFULLY UNTRUE...

The voice of the people is the voice of God.... If and only if, they are not influence by your selfish ambitions and your own interest. Respeto kaaayo mo sa atong balaod, Transform sa ninyo inyong kaugalingon. I still hope for the better Philippines. Hope all of you in favor of the Justice system will renew their minds and face a reality that our system is SICK and in TOXICITY. Base on facts? evidence? not a valid and credible conclusion. Open your eyes logically not literally. It's been around 15 years(WhereTF is the investigators doing), I agree with RMK that you people are LAzy, Even reading his statement you are not comprehending.

I can'y present a Facts/evidence to you my beloved Masakiton,Pinoy_09 and Anino You always keep saying that. Lets face the Reality that our Justice System is SICK and in TOXICITY... I repeat.

[Jumperman]

you need to get your facts bro, and take it on a legal side.

we'll, the truth will set you free.

I respect and understand where the SC is coming from insofar as their verdict, but I am still not convinced that Webb and company's innocence has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. They got off simply because Alfaro's testimony was trashed by the court, they won the case by technicalities. I have to concede though, that the evidence present here really was shaky. If you've taken up Evidence in law school you'd know what I'm talking about and you'd have to agree with the decision. The prosecution back then did not care to cover all the holes in their ship and eventually it sank.

If it makes you feel so good to have chosen the "winning" side in this case (you even felt the need to rub it in through this forum after the verdict was handed out), then congratulations on your victory. Just make sure you understand how the decision was arrived at instead of just latching on to everything that is thrown your way. (Cheche Lazaro makes a documentary, you take the bait hook line and sinker. That's why you started this thread, right?) You agree with the SC, but do you really understand the decision? I'm not insulting you or anything, I just hope you understood the rationale of the ruling and not just feel like you're so smart because you correctly guessed that the SC was going to acquit the accused.