New Hope for Chiong 5.

[phattchoi]

---

daghan sad ug loop holes ilang movie ni paco mao ni akong mga na bantayan:

1. pwede man ma kidnap bisag naa sa manila si paco kay pwede raman cxa mag hire mu kidnap unya pa attendance usa sa manila.
2. ug tao sa isa ka drug lord ang papa sa mga babae unsay connection sa pag kidnap? diversion? ka layu ra sad nila paco para ma connect

[battouter]

sa supreme court ni ha.

People vs Larraaga : 138874-75 : July 21, 2005 : Per Curiam : En Banc : Resolution

mao nay wa hibaw-i sa kadgahanan sa mga taw. naa jud nay reputasyon si paco sa cebu. samot nas josman. hinampak pud tong amaw nga si ocampo ui. gitugtan nalang unta to pa dna o dental para maklaro kinsa tong lawas nakit-an. mas maayo unta ablihan na ang kaso balik para masusi na ug tarung.

[æRLO]

Let me preface that I think the trial was joke, and that they pitch the whole idea about presumption of innocence. It was a textbook example of trial by publicity.

I do, however, warn people about jumping the "Paco is innocent" bandwagon. There was a good reason the court disregarded a lot of the testimonies from the defense as well as the evidences.

[Jantehshiznit]

daghan sad ug loop holes ilang movie ni paco mao ni akong mga na bantayan:

1. pwede man ma kidnap bisag naa sa manila si paco kay pwede raman cxa mag hire mu kidnap unya pa attendance usa sa manila.
2. ug tao sa isa ka drug lord ang papa sa mga babae unsay connection sa pag kidnap? diversion? ka layu ra sad nila paco para ma connect

1. that's a bit absurd but possible in slim chances. airfares that time were outrageously expensive. I guess the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show evidence on that claim. There was actually no record (airlines) to show that Paco flew to Cebu on that period but only evidences that he was in Manila.

[phattchoi]

1. that's a bit absurd but possible in slim chances. airfares that time were outrageously expensive. I guess the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show evidence on that claim. There was actually no record (airlines) to show that Paco flew to Cebu on that period but only evidences that he was in Manila.

datu biya sila boss so mo concern on the airfare. i think i saw nga ni abot cxa cebu sa 17th which is two days after the incident. trying to connect the dots its also a possibility nga murag cxa matermind sa tanan. IMHO

[Jantehshiznit]

datu biya sila boss so mo concern on the airfare. i think i saw nga ni abot cxa cebu sa 17th which is two days after the incident. trying to connect the dots its also a possibility nga murag cxa matermind sa tanan. IMHO

There's also 40 rich people from MNL who would be wasting their time for a testimony but then again they are willing to testify but declined by the court. What do these rich folks has to gain with this case?

[phattchoi]

There's also 40 rich people from MNL who would be wasting their time for a testimony but then again they are willing to testify but declined by the court. What do these rich folks has to gain with this case?

that's what im saying. they are telling the truth to their full knowlegde that they were wtih paco at the time of the kidnapping. my point is the kidnapping could have happened without paco being in cebu.

[Jantehshiznit]

that's what im saying. they are telling the truth to their full knowlegde that they were wtih paco at the time of the kidnapping. my point is the kidnapping could have happened without paco being in cebu.

that would contradict to the testimony of Rustia.

[phattchoi]

that would contradict to the testimony of Rustia.

ah i never saw his testimony but aleast it could remove that possiblity. but paco and rustia dont know each other right?

[Jantehshiznit]

ah i never saw his testimony but aleast it could remove that possiblity. but paco and rustia dont know each other right?

AFAIK, the story based from Rustia that they were the one who kidnap the sisters.

from Paco documentary side, they dont know Rustia and even the other suspects.