Supreme Court acquits Webb, et al

[mimigs]

---

lagi maayo pod mo plagiarize

[unsay_ngalan_nimo]

first, the powers of the SC.

1987 Constitution, Art.VIII
Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:

1. xxxx
2. Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in:
   
   1. xxx
   2. xxx
   3. xxx
   4. All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher.
   5. All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved.
   
   

almost always, the SC will say that it is not a trier of facts, stating that this is best left to the discretion of the lower court since the judges there are in a better position to discerned the witnesses demeanor during trial. however, when a case is elevated on appeal, the appellant usually raises the issue of " the lower court acted in grave abuse of discretion" or " the lower court erred in the application...". this is the contention brought on appeal to CA then to SC. The SC is then required to scrutinize every piece of evidence/testimony that is presented and give its interpretation with legal basis, either in concurrence with or against what the lower court found. when it decided the Webb case, as in most cases, it does not disturb the facts established. the SC merely states how the facts should be viewed, legally.

for example, when Webb presented documentary evidence of his US trip, that fact was not disturbed. what the SC did however, was to rule if it is admissible or not based on law and jurisprudence, to quote from the decision:

Webb’s passport is a document issued by the Philippine government, which under international practice, is the official record of travels of the citizen to whom it is issued. The entries in that passport are presumed true.(Section 44, Rule 130, Rules of Court)
The officers who issued these certifications need not be presented in court to testify on them. Their trustworthiness arises from the sense of official duty and the penalty attached to a breached duty, in the routine and disinterested origin of such statement and in the publicity of the record.(Antilon v. Barcelona, 37 Phil. 148 (1917))

the lower courts did not see it that way, that is why the SC reversed their interpretation on that matter. and this is where the prosecution also failed, the validity of such document is presumed, which means that it can be attacked and proven otherwise thru evidence. the prosecution did not bother to question this document...surely they must have known that if the fact is established that webb was not in the Phils at the time of the crime, then he could not have committed the crime he is implicated in.

and as i said in my first post abt this topic, citing SC spokesman Marquez' statement, the acquittal of Webb et does not necessarily mean that they are innocent. the prosection just failed to establish their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

i agree that their acquittal does not mean they are innocent...

i believe its not only hubert's passport that was looked into by the SC but they did also discredit other testimonies like those given by the security guards, and webbs' laundrywoman...when the CA and the lower court find jessica alfaro credible and the SC think declared otherwise...

was the SC acting within their bounds to do just that...

[masakiton]

Evidence (law) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The law must ensure certain guidelines are set out in order to ensure that evidence presented to the court can be regarded as trustworthy. The law of evidence governs the use of testimony (e.g., oral or written statements, such as an affidavit) and exhibits (e.g., physical objects) or other documentary material which is admissible

[punisher23]

no money no law...2011 DOJ policy...
mao ni ingon sa ako lolo dokyo.....tag-iya sa badian falls

[dubioz]

TRUE. This is the real scandal. Webb/Corona appointment/Truth Commission can be argued, but the comfort women/plagiarism issue is a national embarrassment.

first was the junking of appeal for the comfort women now this, oh well what do you expect from an kangaroo arroyo court

[I-lab-Iero]

It's the prosecution that should be blamed if truly Webb is guilty,
how come with the span of time, they were not able to establish a very solid case.
The SC I think is just there to weigh things up ultimately according to the rules of law,
and by this time because of the shortcomings of the prosecution side they put more
substance on the defense side.
makes me wonder, both the prosecution and the defense side do really shown their
incapacities to handle cases.
The defense side, was not able to prevent Webb spending 15 years behind bars, this technicality
issue should be known long time ago.

[jiro]

i agree that their acquittal does not mean they are innocent...

i believe its not only hubert's passport that was looked into by the SC but they did also discredit other testimonies like those given by the security guards, and webbs' laundrywoman...when the CA and the lower court find jessica alfaro credible and the SC think declared otherwise...

was the SC acting within their bounds to do just that...

it was clearly explained in the SC ruling. the guards, the laundry woman, every piece of evidence.

i dont know who to believe but SC's explanation was more believable than jesica's.

[icysunitz]

let me just share here what I shared in the other thread:

all I can say is DURA LEX SED LEX - The Law is Hard, But It Is The Law.

Q: Why were they acquitted?
A: Prosecution failed to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. THey can be guilty, but the prosecution did not do its homework..they failed to rebut some of the evidences of Webb.. which left a lingering doubt in the mind of the court if they are really guilty.

Q: Why it took 15 years to acquit Webb, et.al.?
A: In 2000, Judge Tolentino (now CA Justice na) CONVICTED them (1995 na file ang case kay mao pa paglutaw ni alfaro, not amparo, as someone here mentioned! LOL). But since we have an animal called APPEAL, the case was appealed before the CA, where the CA AFFIRMED (niuyon) the decision of the RTC (2006). The case was then raised before the SC. If you'll complain na it took 15 years to finally close the case, it is because, our courts have a lot of cases pending before it. wala intawn na nag langay2x ang mga judge.. daghan lang jud. Also, if you must know, Webb presented 95 witnesses! so think of all the direct and cross examinations, redirect and recross na nahitabo. Also, Alfaro was crossexamined 8 times by 8 lawyers! isa ra na ka witness ha! you do the math!

Q: Why Webb, et.al. were not released on bail so that they could have atleast enjoyed their youth?
A: Upon conviction before the RTC, bail is not longer a matter of right. It is subject to the discretion of the court. THink about it daw.. if ang serial killer, na convict sa RTC, but bail was allowed, then he roams around your neighborhood, ganahan mo ana? would you have peace of mind? What if Webb, et.al. were released on bail, kamo ra nag ingon na daghan sila kwarta, pwede ra to sila ka sibat. Besides, when you are convicted in the lower court, guilty ka.. so you stay in jail.

Q: What is this thing called "Reasonable Doubt"?
A: It is that lingering doubt that remains in the mind of a person if the accused indeed committed the crime. In criminal law, if you are guilty, you can play with reasonable doubt. All you need to establish is reasonable doubt. In this case, it's one of two things, either they are really innocent, or bright lang jud kaayo ila lawyers na they played the reasonable doubt card. Webb's lawyers presented voluminous evidences to the point na triple letters na ang exhibits nila.

Q: Where did the State go wrong?
A: This is a personal opinion, I think the prosecutors believed in Alfaro hook, line and sinker na they did not look for any other evidence anymore. They were too complacent that Alibi is a weak defense against a positive identification by a witness.

Q: Why didn't the RTC allowed the DNA testing of the semen swab in 1997 when it was first prayed for by Webb?
A: Back then, we didn't have rules on DNA evidence. Number 1, because walay kamao sa ato nasod na mag conduct ug DNA testing. So the court cannot give probative value on such evidence. for short, even if fan kaayo ang judge nila mac taylor, grissom and horacio cane, he cannot use those information he learned from CSI to apply it in a real case because BACK THEN, we don't have rules unsaon ug appreciate ang DNA Evidence. It was only passed in 2004 ata, if im not mistaken. Mao this year lang na approve ila motion kay karon naman pod sila nangayo usab. (I think they did move for it in the CA, but bag-o pa to ang DNA rules so wala ni gamble ang CA, aside from the fact that the Appellate Courts are not trier of facts).

Q: Why man dili pwede mag move for Reconsideration ang camp ni Lauro?
A: Double Jeopardy sets in. (watch the movie of the same title ni ashley judd, lingaw to.. hehehe)

Q: What if they will do a Reinvestigation?
A: Goodluck! As what was mentioned by another istoryan, All evidences were washed away! Also, for a crime with an imposable penalty of reclusion perpetua or higher, the prescriptive period to prosecute is only 20 years. So, the State has until next year to find the real perpetrators.


I know all these sucks! I can't imagine what Lauro is going through right now. I feel sorry for the old man. Let's just pray for him nalang coz wala na jud ta mahimo.

to all haters of the Judicial System: I know all these don't make sense, but we have Procedures in prosecuting criminal cases. Personally, i think it's the fault of the investigators kay they mishandled the evidence. I think pod the prosecutors/lawyers of lauro had a hand in it pod kay salig kaayo sila ni Alfaro. It's not the system, but the people running it. The judges and justices are there to interpret the evidences and pass judgment according to the Rules.

Im sorry if taas kaayo ha.

BTW, if you haven't read the full decision of the SC, click here:
G.R. No. 176389

so that you can understand why they decided for the acquittal.

[icysunitz]

TRUE. This is the real scandal. Webb/Corona appointment/Truth Commission can be argued, but the comfort women/plagiarism issue is a national embarrassment.

I agree ani bro.. it was not just national, but international pa jud.. imagine, putting the blame on a helpless computer software! Luoy pod kaayo ang legal researcher na gehimo nila na "fall guy" kay she is (or should i say was) a respected lawyer and professor.. gatudlo gud xa'g legal research and writing in one of the top law skul in manila. What SC would do to save one of their own!

[FAQ]

This case is overrated !! Just because one of the accused happens to be a son of Freddie Webb , the media were overhyping this case even though it's nothing different than any other massacre cases in the country . It's funny that some iStoryans here are fully-convinced that Hubert Webb is the suspect even though they didn't conduct any investigation themselves ... They even accuse the Supreme Court of receiving money from the Webbs to acquit the case .. Looooool !!

Noooo wonder our country is a deplorable country plagued with prejudice and racist freaks and think of being FILIPINO IS THE BEST and worth dying for ... Pffffftttt !!