Even as the Makati Regional Trial Court denied his petition to allowed Senate sessions, Sen. Antonuio Trillanes IV held the first organizational meeting of his commitee on civil service at his detention center in the Marine Brig at Fort Bonifacio with Sen. Alan Cayetano in attendance. Media was not allowed to cover it.
From ABS-CBN online:
The Makati City Regional Trial Court on Thursday dismissed anew a petition by Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV to be allowed to attend sessions in the Senate and to set up office and grant interviews in his Fort Bonifacio detention cell.
Judge Oscar Pimentel of Makati RTC Branch 148 junked Trillanes’s motion for reconsideration, saying that the senator’s election did not afford him special privileges.
He cited the Supreme Court’s decision to deny former congressman Romeo Jalosjos’s petition to attend House sessions after his conviction on child rape charges.
Trillanes earlier argued that the court erred in citing the Jalosjos case as basis for its ruling since he is not yet convicted of the crime imputed against him when he filed the petition unlike the former congressman.
He said allowing him to attend the Senate sessions does not constitute “special treatment” and that there are enough precedent cases to allow the “liberal treatment of prisoners who are held without bail.”
Trillanes, one of the alleged leaders of a short-lived mutiny on July 27, 2003, placed 11th in the race for 12 Senate seats in the May 14 elections on the strength of over 11 million votes.
He is also charged with violation of Article of War 96 (conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman) before a general court martial for allegedly leading 300 junior officers and soldiers in the uprising.
Update:
Trillanes to present gov’t official in his defense
Detained senator Antonio Trillanes IV will present a high-ranking official of the Arroyo administration as a “surprise witness” when he presents his defense in the coup d’etat case filed against him and 30 other junior Armed Forces officers on Nov. 8 and 15.
Trillanes’ counsel Reynaldo Robles declined to identify the official except to say that he holds a “very sensitive” position in the government and is privy to the details of the short-lived 2003 Oakwood mutiny.
“We might present the official as our surprise witness. Discussions are still ongoing at present,” Robles said after last Thursday’s hearing at the Makati regional trial court.
He said the official has been in government for several years now, including in 2003 when the alleged mutiny took place.
Robles said the official’s testimony will be in favor of Trillanes. “He would testify in favor of the accused that they did not commit the offense of coup d’etat as charged by the Department of Justice. He would testify that there was really no offense of coup d’etat committed.”
Robles pointed out that the accused have not committed any of the qualifying factors listed in the Revised Penal Code (Article 134-A) like attacking government offices or military installations or using force or violence to warrant the filing of coup d’etat charges against them.
Aside from Trillanes, Robles also serves as counsel for 13 other officers belonging to the Magdalo group, including Navy Ltsg. James Layug, Eugene Louie Gonzalez, Manuel Cabochan and Andy Torrato, and Ensign Arman Pontejos and Army 1Lt. Sonny Sarmiento.
Aside from the said official, Robles said they might also call to the witness stand the congressmen and senators who authored the law penalizing coup d’etat, like former senators Jovito Salonga and Rene Saguisag. The latter is the lawyer of another accused, Army 1Lt Nathaniel Rabonza.
Trillanes’ turn to present his witnesses and evidence will be preceded by those of Army Capts. Gerardo Gambala and Milo Maestrocampo on Oct. 10, PAF Capt. Segundino Orfiano and 1Lts Francisco Ashley Asedillo and Billy Pascua, and Rabonza. – Ashzel Hachero
Bakit hindi kumikilos ang 11M na bumoto sa kaniya? He should be allowed to hook up to the session even via cyberspace!
Senator Trillanes should be allowed permission to participate in the session and interrogation of these people in this NBN deal even via telephone. The voters have a right to demand this!!!
kawawa naman itong si huwes pimentel.
lalong nagmumukhang tanga sa ginagawang pagsikil sa karaapatan at obligasyon bilang hinalal na mambabatas ni senador antonio trillanes IV.
mas lamang ang kiling niya sa huwag kaysa tunay na lingkod bayan!
sige, magsipsip ka pa!
Iyan din ba ang judge na ginagago ni Dorobo doon sa horny na Amerikano? E gago nga! Kapangalan pa naman ni Senator Pimentel!
Ang kaso ni Trillanes walang mangyari diyan. I-akyat na sa Supreme Court. Pagwala pa rin ang huling paraan diyan Parliament of the Street. Kaso hindi nga makakuha ng permit para mag rally. So ganon pa rin ang Pinas within the next 100 years.
it is good that the rule of law still prevails. He thought he can escape justice by being a senator.
duren:
The people speak through their representatives – the government (exec, legislative, judiciary). Laws are promulgated by the people, through the reps.
But the people can also speak directly, through the ballot; when they ratify the Constitution, or when they elect somebody. When the Master speaks, the subordinate must obey. The law is always subordinate to the ballot, for the law is made by reps, while the ballot is the direct voice of the people.
That is the issue here – the arrogance of a rep (judge) in defying his Masters (the people).
Lagi na lang excuse yang Rule of Law by those who flout the law. Where was the Rule of Law when Erap was deemed to have “Constructively resigned”?
Where is the Rule of Law, when a mere EO (464) is invoked over a Supreme Court decision.
Where is the Rule of Law, when you manufacture ballots?
Justice ba kamo? Or Just ice. Yan ang nananalaytay sa ugat ng mga walang pakiramdam. The poor are getting poorer, the kurakots are getting more swapang, and the cowardly generals are defeated by the mere whiff of a few million peso bills.
Don’t you notice? Those who constantly invoke the law are the ones who keep breaking it – Glo, Bush, Cheney, Macoy. Those who have the respect of the people hardly need to invoke the law because the people are behind them – Lee Kuan Yew, Margaret Thatcher, Winston Churchill; locally, Cory had her good moments the first few months after the real EDSA (sa aking walang EDSA two or three – parehong peke).
At ang magsasabi ng katotohanan ay masama …. yan ba ang Rule of Law? Ang pandadaya, pagnanakaw, pagsisinungaling yan ba ay Rule of Law?
Ganyan na ba ngayon ang gusto ng mga pekeng naka-upo. 86 milyong Pinoy ang ginagago ng mga tang nang mga yan, ano pa ang ginagawa natin??? Mas masahol pa ang panahon ngayon kaysa panahon ni Marcos. Dati ang balita noon ay ang mag-asawa lang ang nangungurakot ngayon lahat na silang mga buwayang inang mga yan. Ano pa ba ang hinihintay natin mga kabayan … hihintayin pa ba natin na ibenta tayo ng mga Arroyong yan sa mga Intsik. Pupunta na naman daw ang Butiking Pangulo (Daw) sa China para dagdagan pa ang utang. Tapos dadagdagan na naman ang tax natin hindi na lang EVAT kundi EVATVAT na. Ibig sabihin niyan .. lahat ang sahod niyo kay Glorya niyo na ibigay.
Yuko, Judge Pimentel was not the same judge that ruled on the Nicole Subic rape case.
Maraming salamat atty36252. Dito sa Canada walang mga deal gaya ng ZTE so walang problema. I-isa lang ang men in uniform RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) pero mabilis pagikaw nagkasala, kaso agad. Kung ikaw immigrant na sinugaling, magnanakaw, and they like, pakingan ka sa court pero isang lang ang kalabasan diyan – deportation. May mga Chinese products or toys na ni-reject ng Canada at US, dahil diyan gumanti ang China ayaw silang bumili ng US & Canadian beef. Kahapon lang nag-appreciate ang Canadian dollar pareho na sa US dollars so mura na pag namili sa US. Iyon ay dahil sa magandang patakbo ng bansa, pantay-pantay.
It is clearly understood that the government officials are just employees of the people or sambayanang Filipino kung wala ng tiwala ang tao, umalis na lang sa position hindi na kailangan pa-alisin pa. Sana hindi na umabot diyan sa drama sa senado, gastos lamng yan sa bansa. Kami naman dito sa North American nakatulong din sa economia ng Pinas.
Duren, kung ikaw ay kampi kay Gloria Arroyo, wala kang karapatan mag-invoke ng rule of law kasi si Gloria Arroyo ang number one na nambabastos ng batas.
Kulang ang espasyo dito kung isa-isahin natin ang batas na binaluktot niya para lang siya manatili sa kapangyarihan.
If you want the rule of law to prevail, dapat kasama ka sa pagpatanggal kay Gloria Arroyo para bumalik na ang rule of law sa bansang ito.
atty36252,
Thanks, you already voiced out what I wanted to say.
“That is the issue here – the arrogance of a rep (judge) in defying his Masters (the people).”
Dagdag ko lang: That the judge, Oscar Pimentel of Makati RTC Branch 148 in this case, is heavily influenced by the hands that cradle him in his dialysis crib machine.
Saan ba naman corner ng mundo na ayaw sundin ng judge ang boses ng mga tao na ayon naman sa Constitution?! Onli in da Pilipins!
Gusto ko nang magwala sa kawalang respeto ni Gloria sa batas at sa kawalang bayag ng kanyang mga judges to go agaisnt her caprichos.
Kahit na sinong matino ang isip ay alam na kapag ibinoto ng tao, siya ay dapat maglingkod sa kanyang bansa at mamamayan. Sentido Comon, pero kahit ito ay binabale wala pa rin ni Gloria Lucifera to hang on the throne that’s not hers!
This power bitch named Gloria Macapagal Arroyo is not human! Walang rehabilistasyon para sa swapang sa kapangyarihan!
Sorry may errors ang post ko sa itaas dahil sa 530am na dito was West Coast of North America. See you this afternoon or early evening. Thank you.
Hang in there, Senator Sonny Trillanes 1V. Tulad sa mga magigiting na sundalo na nakakakulong sa Tanay, tuloy ang aming dasal at suporta para sa iyong kalayaan.
Supreme Court na ba ang susunod na laban, Ellen?
Rule of Law under Kwin Korap?! My foot! She turned it to just an imaginary tool of freedom!
Thanks, Ellen. Sorry for the outburst, but I can’t help getting emotional especially after finishing an interview that I am translating right now for a documentary on the agrarian problem/dispute in the Philippines. Nakakaawa pala ang situation nila lalo na iyong mga farmers sa Negros, and why they are atttracted to the NPA. To be free from want, they are either killed by private armies of those rich hacienderos who continue to oppress them or join the NPA.
Kawawang Pilipinas!
duren: “he thought he can escape justice by being a senator?” well, my dear does Mike Arroyo think he can run away with the money they got through corruption just because he is the husband of the peke president? I don’t know if you believe in God, but if you do “isn’t it that we believe God rules the earth with justice?” And in Him we trust? I do, believe this, and just you wait and see..duren..just you wait and see..may doctorate ka rin seguro kaya gusto mo doctorin ang batas ng Dios? Try again!
Atty 36252: thank you. may your tribe increase!
Yuko: the agrarian problem in Negros has always been there..kaya lang ang mga farmers in Negros do not seem to be as aggressive as those in Luzon..I don’t know why..controlado sila or could be also the paternalistic approach? Kasi lahat ay asa sa may ari ng hacienda..may hacienderos na abusado, mayroon din na mabait..because Antique is a poor province we do not have hacienderos tahimik..pero marami na rin daw ang NPA..The Columban Missionaries were active in getting the farmers organized but I do not know if they still are..
“He thought he can escape justice by being a senator.”
Duren,
Is this the same logic why every Arroyo opted to run for public office?
And is Glueria really running again in 2010, only this time, as a Congresswoman… so she can “escape justice”?
From being president to congresswoman, di ba masagwa ‘yon? Kung sabagay, sanay na sa kalaswaan ang rehimen na ‘to.
Sa akin kasi mas maganda… from being a Lieutenant to Senator, di ba?
First and foremost, I wonder how Duren knew what Trillanes thought…
Ano ba ang ibig sabihin ng “ALRIGHT” sa mga PMA’ers? Mukhang malalim ang ibig sabihin sa kanila nito. Kaya pala tayo inool-rayt-olrayt niyang Esperon na yan. Eto na naman kudeta na naman daw ….. sinang-ayunan pa ng Punong inang yan. Ano ba talaga mga mukhang kuwalta kailan ba kayo maa-awa sa mga tao? Mga Hayop yang mga Arroyo na yan …. kita niyo puro Bilyonaryo na sila sa kakukurakot nila …. kakapal ang mukha.
I remember Oplan Alan, pinagkakitahan din ni Asspweron ng milyon at the expense of Trillanes?! Mahabaging langit!
Duren;
it is good that the rule of law still prevails. He thought he can escape justice by being a senator.
Es una regla de la ley o una regla por la ley?
Rule of Law and Rule by Law has a different meaning Duren. The first is kanaway and the second is Bulik.—- Rule- OF- Law applies without Money, Rule- BY- Law applies involve Money.—–Tama ba ako Atorni?
Trillanes case is an intellectual dishonesty, the judge role of precedent in promoting unpredictability, none stability, and none integrity in the judicial process.” Although acknowledging that it is sometimes necessary for judges to reconsider precedents, and should be reserved for exceptional circumstances, considering the more than 11 Million plus alive bodies who voted for him,NOT the manufactured oblivion souls that counted by Garci, Abalos and Bedol.That is “Kanaway” and the rule- OF- Law.
In Gloria’s Wonderland, her minions are engaging in looting and war against Cinderella. Those who disobeyed her magic wand were punished, jailed, tortured and even death.That is “Bulik” and the rule-BY-law.
Kung si AT4 ay kinumpara nila kay Jalosjos, I wonder to whom shall we compare GMA with?
Meron pa bang mas masahol dito?
I heard Trillanes has a surprise witness to vouch that there was no coup. That witness was a government official. Let’s wait and see who this witness is. Pero kahit na may witness, hindi din papansinin ng mga loko sa Malacanang. Trillanes, Erap and the rest might have to wait until GMA’s ouster or the next leader. Wala silang magagawa hanggang nasa poder ang gaga.
Ang hirap sa ating mga pinoy, napaka pessimist nating lahat, we see ourselves as losers and embrace every issue na parang wala nang pag-asa….Why are we so prone in comparing the Marcos era sa panahon natin ngayon……”mas malala pa raw ngayun kaysa panahon ni Marcos”…my goodness, gising ka ba habang sinasabi mo ito? Where is the sense?
We are too eager to remove Arroyo that we will satisfy ourselves to elect a person behind bars, pathetic di ba? Ano ang alam nya sa pag gawa ng batas? Think people think! Wag puro emosyon ang ibuhos natin sa lahat ng ating mga desisyon specially kung ito ay para sa kapakanan ng bayan natin.
Hindi si Arroyo ang problema kung hindi ang paraan kung paano tayo mag isip. Kahit sino pa ilagay mo dyan sa pwesto hindi pa rin mawawala ang mga issue ng pandaraya at pagnanakaw at hindi tayo makukuntento dahil tayo ay utak talangka. We aim for a perfect leader, a perfect government na kahit nga sa sarili natin hindi natin kayang magbago at mag tiis para sa bayan. Konting bawal lang na ibigay ng isang batas mag ra-rally na tayo agad kasi against daw sa freedom natin, konting disiplina lang na ibigay ng batas and people will insinuate that we are under martial rule. Pinoy nga naman.
I have just accidentally bump into a TAG website which claims to have the solutions to the problems of corruption in this country.
But i wonder why, when i looked who were the members of the Steering Committee and the Implementing Partners, is corruption still rampant in this part of the world?
Here’s that website… http://www.tag.org.ph/about/default.htm
Our goal is to build consensus on a concrete agenda for counter-corruption reform.
Ganda, no?
Kaso hanggang [bankang] papel lang ‘ata to.
duren ikaw lang ang utak talangka wag mo akong idamay. Kung makakalabas si Trillanes sigurado ako may magagawang batas yan at na sisigurado ko din na magpapagawa siya ng maraming highway at mahaba na hindi kapirangot. Sana ang ipangalan sa highway ay “Duren Express Way”
Duren,
Iisa lang ang tama sa sinabi mo na kahit sino uupo ay hindi pa rin mawawala ang pag nanakaw at pandadaraya. Iyan ang gina ugalian na ng mg beteranong at bagitong politiko sa atin. Dahil ang kasabihan nila ay Kami naman ngayon…
Pero sa sinabi mo na hindi si Gloria ang problema at doon ka yata nagkakamali at ikaw yata ang isip talangka eh. Hindi ba problema ang pang agaw niya ng puwesto, Ang pag nanakaw nilang mag asawa sa gobyerno , ang pandaraya. Hindi ko alam kung papaano mo masasabi na hindi si Gloria ang problema at Kung isip talangka ang ibang tao ay siguro ay ikaw ay isip langgam naman.
People no longer compare Marcos to GMA. There’s no comparison at all. GMA will go down in the Philippine history and even world history as the most corrupt leader. Dapat sa pangalan mo Duleng hindi Duren. Hindi mo pa ba nakikita ang mga nangyayari at kailangan pa bang i-compare?
Duren,
Huwag mo na kaming idamay sa utak talangka, kung puedi ay sarilinin mo na lang.
To atty36252 tanong lang po. You said: “people can also speak directly, through the ballot; when they ratify the Constitution, or when they elect somebody. When the Master speaks, the subordinate must obey. The law is always subordinate to the ballot, for the law is made by reps, while the ballot is the direct voice of the people.”
Ibig po bang sabihin pwede nating iboto kung ang isang accuse ay guilty o hindi? Does it mean because Trillanes got 11 Million votes that he can walk a free man not guilty of any charges? Nakakatakot naman pala…
Sa pagkaka-alam ko Trillanes was voted because people thought he can serve them well, not because they believe he is innocent. The election result only concludes that the people trust him, that he is popular and nothing else. In this case the subordinate and master analogy still applies…tama ba?
Elect a person behind bars – pathetic daw sabi ni duren. Di ba na-elect si Ninoy noong 78 while behind bars? Mandela is another person who was behind bars a long time.
Walang alam? Let’s look at some walang alams of history.
Benjamin Franklin, never finished grade school, helped draft the US Constitution.
John Major, before becoming the PM, was Chancellor of the Exchequer, equivalent to the Secretary of Finance. He never finished high school.
Margaret Thatcher, who improved the British economy was a Chemistry major – definitely walang alam sa economiya.
Abraham Lincoln was another walang alam, walang tinapos.
Locally, there is Andres Bonifacio.
How about the walang alams of Glo? Nardong Putik, Tito Sotto, Lito Lapid, Sonny Jawo, Manny Pacquiao, at iba pa.
How about this maraming alam na Doctor of Economics? Imbis na gamutin ang economiya, dinoktor ang ballot, dinodoktor ang economic stats (tanunging niyo nga ang mga gutom kung improved ang economiya?), dodoktorin ang Constitution.
Bata pa ang marami sa inyo. I still remember the famous retort of one walang alam (Cory) to Macoy – wala akong alam sa pagnanakaw, pagpatay, pag-api ng mga tao.
Fine. Let me have the walang alam with an engineering degree from the PMA instead of Lito Lapid et. al.
Of course there is the retort na wala ding alam ang artistang si Erap. But remember, he was mayor for twenty years, before becoming a senator.
Duleng, at least inamin mo na na sikat si Trillanes at may tiwala ang mga bumoto. What about your boss in Malacanang? Hindi na nga popular, walang tiwala ang mga tao, galit na galit pa sila. And yet she still doesn’t want to leave and get out of the Palace. You know what? If an election were to be held today between GMA and Trillanes, I’m gonna bet my life and soul that Trillanes will end up the winner if there’s no cheating. Subukan lang natin.
duren:
Ang pinatatawad ng ballot ay ang political crimes – rebellion, coup d etat, etc.
Walang patawad sa non-political crimes – e.g. rape by Jalosjos, etc.
Didn’t Glo’s husband admit their coup against Erap? But now she says patawad na, because she got elected. Of course, ang bumoto ay si Garci, hindi ang taong bayan
Ang dagdag, ang dagdag. Dati, balota lang, ngayon, ang dagdag, ang dagdag, sa ZTE millions.
to atty36252…Sa kaso ni Trillanes:
Ano ang alam nya sa pag gawa ng batas?, hindi ba wala naman siyang nagawang kabutihan para sa bayan prior to that coup incident, and holding innocent people hostages just to pursue his cause does not make him a hero either. Comparing him to the likes of Franklin is just overrated.
A coup is a political crime. An election (erection daw, sabi ng Hapon) is a political exercise. Like you said, when people elect somebody, they impliedly say they trust him/her. So, if they trust in his leading or representing them, they also impliedly say patawad ko na ang ostensible transgression mo. Imbis na parusahan kita, ibig kong ikaw ang magsalita para sa akin.
To trust somebody to speak for you is inconsistent with the desire to punish him. In fact, you are rewarding him with the authority to speak in your behalf. Since the reward was given, impliedly the punishment has been waived.
Ganoon din ang theory sa Cory government. There was, a coup, backed up by the military and the people. Cory was guilty of rebellion. But, the ratification of the Constitution and her laws meant that the people forgave the earlier infraction. Yes she also exercised legislative powers briefly – guess who drafted them, Joker Arroyo.
duren:
Ano ang alam ni Lito Lapid sa pag gawa ng batas? Ano ang alam ni Margaret Thatcher sa pag gawa ng batas?
I do not mean to compare Trillanes to Thatcher, only to show that the making of laws need not be done by lawyers – Thatcher is a chemist.
Ang mambabatas ay sugo ng mga tao, para magsalita para sa mga tao. May sapat na abogado na sa bawat chamber, para sa technicalities of law making. Nandiyan din ang legislative staff, who are lawyers.
I know, I used to work in the Cory Senate. In that Senate, the non-lawyers Ting Paterno and Butz Aquino outshone lawyers like Vic Ziga and Joey Lina, and law non-graduate Heherson Alvarez.
atty36252: I was actually reacting to your comment:”Elect a person behind bars – pathetic daw sabi ni duren. Di ba na-elect si Ninoy noong 78 while behind bars? Mandela is another person who was behind bars a long time.”
Sa palagay ko po Mandela and Ninoy’s status is not analogous to Trillanes and his ilk simply because the former were respected by the people bago sila nakulong, they have their credibility even without endangering the lives of the people. Their advocacy for peace and justice were the prime reason why they were convicted in the first place.
duren
ang tatay ko walang pinag-aralan, pero nakagawa ng batas at siya naming sinusunod at tinutupad at yan din ang isasabatas sa aming magiging anak at apo. Ito ang mga batas ng aking tatay,
1) Huwag kang magnakaw
2) Huwag kang masinungaling
3) Huwag kang mandaya sa kapwa mo
4) Huwag kang gahaman sa kapangyarihan.
Marami pa hindi ko na lang ilalagay.
Siguro naman makukuha mo na kung papaano gumawa ng batas, kung hindi mo pa rin makuha ay talagang utak talangka ka. Ayoko ng batas ni Gloria dahil hindi siya ang tunay na pinuno ng bayang Pilipinas. Siya ay magnanakaw, mandaraya, sinungaling.Patalsikin na ang mga kumukurakot sa kaban ng bayan.
Duren: Ano ang alam ni Bong Revilla sa pag-gawa ng batas?
Bakit palaging absent sa ZTE-NBN scam hearing sa Senado?
May suhol ba?
Hindi issue si Sen. Trillanes dahil siya ay tunay na halal bilang senador ng republika. Si Gloria Arroyo ay isang usurper. Walang mandatos, peke-bogus. Hello Garci! Hello Abalos!
Issue ba ang influence peddling? Ang issue ay si Miguel Arroyo a.k.a. Jose Pidal kung bakit siya naki-sawsaw sa $329 M ZTE-NBN scam. Bakit palaging sabit si Jose Pidal sa anomalya? Baka na sa breeding o lahing mandarambong.
atty36252:
Let us use the universal language:
Almost 40 Million Filipinos voted in the last May election,
11 Million voted for Trillanes but also 29 Million did not. It means that Trillanes was only elected as a Senator since the 11 Million votes qualifies him, but it does not similarly imply his innocence since the majority did not vote for him. In simple sentence, he was elected, but he was not vindicated.
In a democracy, I believe we should respect the voice of the majority.
Tikbalang,
ang batas ng tatay mo ay batas din ng tatay ko. Kahit kami at mahirap lang, nakakatulog kami ng mapayapa sa gabi dahil alam namin na walang kaming tinatapakang tao para lang makamit ang pansarili naming hangarin. Kung may gusto kaming maabot, pinagtratrabahuhan namin ito ng malinis. Sabi ng tatay ko, hindi baleng mahirap kami, basta malinis lang ang pangalan namin at wala kaming inapi. Yan din dapat ang batas ni Gloria para maging ehemplo sya ng bawat pilipino. Pero sa totoo lang – dapat wala na tayong ibang batas na sundin kundi ang sampung batas ng Diyos na kung hindi mo man kabisado – yong Golden Rule na “do unto others what you would want others do unto you”
duren:
Hindi ako Trillanes fan. But the people have chosen him.
Wala rin akong bilib kay Joma. Nagpapasarap sa the Hague, ang kaibigan kong inudyukan ng mga Komunista, namundok, namatay. But if the people chose Satur, who am I to object?
Yan ang point ko. The most dangerous man is one who thinks he knows what is best for the other guy – Hitler, Macoy, Mao.
Kung gusto ng tao si Trillanes, so be it. Kung gusto ng tao si Lito Lapid so be it. Of course it will not prevent me from being derisive about Lapid’s brain, or the lack of it.
So your point, marunong bang gumawa ng batas si Trillanes, well the people have already spoken and said they will take a chance on him.
Now about Judge Pimentel, ibang usapan yan. He should abide by the people, whom he swore to serve. To paraphrase Justice Frankfurter, I am here to do justice as the people define it by law (or the ballot). I am not here to uphold my own sense of justice. I serve the people, I am not here to be served by them.
duren,
Simpleng sagot: Majority wins, winner takes all! Tapos na debate.
duren:
Mali na naman. the only definition of the majority is the ballot. Kung may ayaw bumoto, you deserve whom you elect, or whom you allow to be elected.
Mas maraming may gusto kay Gore, but they did not troop to the polls. Until we can find another system, we will have to abide by the only way to ascertain the majority, which is the ballot.
Ang mahirap, you invoke the ballot for Glo, but repudiate it for Trillanes. Principio ng duling yan.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha si duren nag papatawa. Yang 11 million na bomoto kay trillanes siya ay nakakulong pa kung siya ay pinalaya at nangampanya baka siya nanguna bilang senador dahil ang taong bayan ay sawa na sa kahirapan at kurakutan sa kaban ng bayan. Dinaya pa nga yan…..
Dureng Duling:
Tama ngang tanungin ka kung saang planeta ka galing.
Sa tanong mong..Ano ang alam ni Trillanes sa paggawa ng batas? “E, si bossing mo, hindi ba ang alam ay ang paglabag lang sa batas?”
Basta, dapat na talagang isagawa ang grand exit ng pammilyang illegal na nakaupo sa silya ng Malakanyang!
Duren,
Kung totoong 40 millions ang bumoto. Sa palagay ko ay mas higit sa 11 millions ang nakuhang boto ni Trillanes dahil kung malinis ang comelec at wala ang mga hinayupak abalos at ang mga bata niya ay hihigit ang bilang ng boto ng oposisyon. at Si Bakling Zubiri ay hindi mananalo.
Hindi lang madaya ng husto nina Abalos si trillanes dahil alam niya na magagalit ang taong bayan. Ika nga ng Maam Gloria mo ay iyun dagdag. iyung dagdag… Tignan mo ang nangyari sa pambato ni Gloria ilan ang pumasok.. Sa susunod ay sina Siradora Miriam at Lolo Ulyanin Enrile at Fat Gordon ay hindi na rin mananalo sa susunod na Elections para sa Senado.
Atty’s “Hindi ako Trillanes fan. But the people have chosen him.
“Wala rin akong bilib kay Joma. Nagpapasarap sa the Hague, ang kaibigan kong inudyukan ng mga Komunista, namundok, namatay. But if the people chose Satur, who am I to object?
Yan ang point ko.”
I ditto that, atty…
atty36252: for the record wala po akong pakialam kay arroyo…and I did not invoke anything for her. My opinion was based in my judgment and no other.
I think you missed my point there, I did not count the people who did not vote, but the 40 M ay estimate ng taong bomoto. 40 Million is the total number of people who casted their votes through the ballots and 29 Million did not vote for Trillanes. Is this logic hard to comprehend? The majority is the 29 Million…not the 11 Million…kung mali ako baka baliktad na ang mundo.
Duren,
Baliktad nga ang mundo mo.. 40 millions ang bomoto at tantadahan mo 1/2 ng boto ay ninakaw nila at nilagay sa mga asong ulol pero hindi pa rin nanalo. Doon sa Mindanao sila nandaya ng dagdag at bawas na boto. Kaya mahigit sa 11 millions pa ang nakuha ni trillanes kung malinis ang botohan
hahaha..supal2 c trillanes pati ang mga katribo nya sa oposisyon..that why senator Gordon argue in the point of separation of powers..the court has it own powers no one can break that rule even the senate itself cannot change that decision..ok lng yan if you commit crime you have to take all the punishment for it..alam yan ni trillanes..
Binoto ko rin si trillanes dahil wala naman ako maaasahan sa mg aganid na alagad ni gloria. Pero hindi rin ako FAN niya. Isa rin ako na nag basakali na mabago niya ang sitwasyon natin ngayon. Kesa naman sayangin ko ang boto ko kayla Sabit Singson at Mike Defector etc.. Di kay trillanes na lang diba.
Okay, gusto mo ng numbers, the other 29 may have voted for the other senators, that does not necessarily mean against sila kay Trillanes; baka lang number 14 si Trillanes sa kanila.
This is the difficulty of the magic twelve, not like the president, where if the vote is not for Erap, it is for Glo, or maybe abstain. So you cannot conclude that the 29 million are against Trillanes.
But the ranking is clear, Trillanes is number 11, it makes him a voice of the people. Our system says, if you win, you are the voice of the people.
Ramos was the president, although he did not get the majority. The votes for Miriam and others were more than for Ramos. So by your logic, Ramos should not have been president. There were more against him, than for him. But the law says he is, and I accepted him as the president. Nasaan na ang iyong rule of law?
Duren,
dnt worry Duren ur not alone here.hehe..cge mga mka trillanes ilabas nyo lhat ng arguments nyo..we can depend our positions.
I am expressing my opinions based from what I think. Ganun naba talaga ka kitid ang utak natin that we refuse to accept opinions that deviate from ours…what freedom and justice that you demand from our leaders, I demand it from you. Respeto lang po.Ito ang sabi ni Duren.
Que Barbaridad Porque Barabas, Duren Seniora! Respect is earned, not given. You are demanding respect from a people who want to kill your president. Are you living in a fantasy world and blindfolded? Let me hold your hands and walk you to the aisle of respect for you to know Mariposa! A value of respect money can’t buy.You can buy your enemies flesh but, you can’t buy their souls. Though person has the chance to make a personal decision, that’s a “Judgment Call”. When that person feels sincere respect for someone else, they will make a different decision than if they feel no respect, even if they have customarily shown a false, pseudo-respect to the person. It is like a “Third Law of Newton” when there is Action there is Reaction.
But, in Gloria’s Wonderland, since Snow White rejected her to be counted as her dwarfs, Nungka Day! Ada pala ti hinanakit niya inside!Sisikat din ako,maghintay ka lang Snow White! So she seems much more possible to survive without being respected. Looting, looting, Jueteng, Jueteng a large sum of money, traveled to China and convinced the singkit to rob her people with AB ZTE FG, have many general and employed henchmen of all kinds and have constantly calling on them on either Helo Garci or Moshi! Moshi, Ben!Her Chiwawas and Bulldogs licked her “Devil’s Wand” and yet not be respected in the least.Perhaps because of the way they treats others.–Now, I go on recess,I already give you and important topic on the subject as what you called respect and you are demanding for it. I am sorry Lavinia, I don’t have Socli!
atty36252″Ramos was the president, although he did not get the majority. The votes for Miriam and others were more than for Ramos. So by your logic, Ramos should not have been president.
”
In all fairness let me point out that I did not conclude Trillanes was not elected as Senator, just as Ramos was elected as President. My only point of view that I have explained and I will not explain again, is that Trillanes was elected a senator because the 11 Million votes qualify him but it does not mean that the people has invicted him of his crimes because he does not have the vote of the Majority. Yes it is true that 29 Million who voted for the other senators do not necessarily mean that they are against Trillanes, but it is clear to say that the 29 M voters do not agree to elect him. Klaro di ba? Ito po ang aking rule of law. Nasaan din po yung sa inyo?
Funny how these stooges and alter-egos of the Pidal daughter insult hers and their people. Over in the land of the rising sun, a candidate for the Diet does not even have to be lawyer to be one. Anyone willing to be scrutinized and even slaved by the people, not be their boss but a real public servant can be a parliamentarian. And boy, is our parliament any worse? No way!
The law is in fact drafted by a special committee made up of people from various walks of life. They are passed and implemented even with the consent of the people either by directly voting for such law or delegating the job to their representatives in the Diet.
Kaya ano itong pinagsasabi ng mga tuta ng mga magnanakaw that Trillanes, just because he is not a lawyer, is not capable of passing a law and a good one at that? Gago din ano? Iyan ang nangyayari sa mga taong akala nila sila na ang pinakamakapangyarihan sa mundo, nagdudunung-dunungan lang pero mga bobo! Ang kawawa ang bansa nilang nilulubog nila.
My condolence and sympathy to the Filipinos, na sobra talaga ang dakila!!! ;-(
duren:
The law says, if you are elected, you are the people’s voice, not just the voice of those who elected you. Being the voice of the people (a reward) and being indicted ( a punishment) are inconsistent. The accusation meriting a punishment was made by a rep – remember, he is innocent until proven guilty. The reward came directly from the people.
In the Cory Senate, I wanted to vote for more than 12, including Burgos, the father of Jonas, but there were only twelve slots, so wala si Burgos. That does not mean I was against him. That does not mean I did not want to vote for him.
There is a leap of logic from not voting for Trillanes and agreeing with Si Raulo to indict. Dahil gusto ko si Kiki I mean Kiko, does not mean that I agree with the indictment, of Trillanes; dahil si Kiko ang issue – trusting or not trusting Kiko.
But trusting Trillanes to speak for the people, and the need to punish are clearly inconsistent, so there is logic in concluding that he was forgiven.
I already explained to you that the voice of 11 million should supersede the voice of a rep. The 29 million did not indicate that they agree to indict Trillanes – gawa lang ni Si Raulo yan. Ang masama pa, the mastermind kuno, Gringo, was not indicted, upon “reconsideration.”
Diyan nakikita ang iniquity in treatment. Por kursunada ang trato, hindi by principle. So there is no rule of law, only the rule of kursunadahan.
I am following the logic of Duren not in defense of him (I do not know him) but the way he (or she?) structures reason. I am all for diverse ideas. It would be boring to just read mono-directional flow of ideas. Let us welcome even those whom we might think are contrarians. In the market of ideas such as this blog, we chose our positions and bargain with others. The thing is we all expect that everyone will share our thoughts and critiques on various issues. But mind you, we can all improve and mature through the shared experience of others. Invariably, we all dislike evil in all forms in society. Whether benign or evil done without reasonable doubt is inconsequential. Laws are made by our reps with passioned debates, but the people can de-fang it at the booth in silence and meekness.
Duren;
Trillanes was elected a senator because the 11 Million votes qualify him but it does not mean that the people has invicted him of his crimes because he does not have the vote of the Majority.
There will be nothing to vindicate Trillanes nor any pardon. He was not yet found guilty by any court, He is not a convicted felon. He is detained and accused which the prosecutor are confused what kind of charges to be attributed to him.
His case and Jaloslos has no comparisons.
Jaloslos was convicted of raped and child molestation.
Trillanes is charge with rebellion and held in detention.
I don’t even understand which precedence case, the judge based his court decision to denied Trillanes motion.–The Jaloslos case. It’s pure intellectual dishonesty and that is a Rule by law.not a Rule of Law.
Pulsing public sentiment pa si Ta-Kyut daughter here. Mali talaga ang hakbang ng taong ito. OK ang mano a mano but not hitting the belt. But coming over here to rock the boat, manigas sila.
Ang bastos talaga. Imagine coming here and trying hard to tell Ellen what and what not to write is actually an attempt to deprive her of her freedom of expression. In fact, this idiot is telling bloggers here likewise to “back off” like how her father tried to get rid of Joey dV because he was useless to him when the younger de Venecia refused to be a privy to a big-time scam, which this ZTE/NBN deal is all about.
What Filipinos should be made aware of is that any deal being entered into by these criminals who are circumventing the law and do not actually follow any rule of law is definitely and one hundred percent illegal!!!
Sabi nga, “Good and evil cannot mix.” The Scriptures are very explicit about this as in “A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.” (Matt. 7:18)
…hitting below the belt….
You bet, Trillanes cannot be compared with convicted felon, Jalosjos, a pedophile and a sex maniac. Trillanes just pledged disobedience to a criminal calling herself “president” even when in fact, she should have been sent to jail for sedition, treason and worse, murder of hundreds of Filipinos who are trying their best to make life better for them and their fellow Filipinos like those peasants in Negros who are rallying in front of DAR and getting beaten by those butete calling themselves law enforcers. Pwe!
Just how much longer ba talaga will Filipinos take up arms against these Al Capones, et al of Philippine politics? Sobrang dakila talaga!
“Never try to teach a pig to acquire knowledge on the obvious Rules of Law that he refuses to understand; it wastes your time and annoys the pig”.
Re: “40 Million is the total number of people who casted their votes through the ballots and 29 Million did not vote for Trillanes.”
We can apply this very simplistic therefore to Gloria too.
Rule of Law? Nakupo! pabalik-balik na naman ang tugtog ng sirang plaka. Mis-rule of law, yes. And that’s precisely what’s happening under GMA’s regime buffeted by questions of illegitimacy.
atty36252, you have hit the nail’s head more than those legal minds who have long bartered their souls!
WWNL:
Someone is trying to preach a message which is beyond their comprehensible mind.There is no Rule of Law under punggok’s regime but a rule by law.She rule by her own law.–
“Boltai da e’Tolko”–Too much talk,no meaning.
Re:Ang mahirap, you invoke the ballot for Glo, but repudiate it for Trillanes. Principio ng duling yan.
Hahahaha! Oks na Oks ka, Atty 36252!
Technically, the crime of coup d’état in the military is as Trillanes’ lawyer describes it:
“Robles pointed out that the accused have not committed any of the qualifying factors listed in the Revised Penal Code (Article 134-A) like attacking government offices or military installations or using force or violence to warrant the filing of coup d’etat charges against them.”
So, given that the “mutiny” was staged in a civilian compound, that could be used but I doubt it would hold – the intent to topple down the govt was actually coursed through the threats of planting explosive devices.
Anyway, there are three major, important factors to consider to qualify a segment of the military attempting to topple the govt as coup d’état according to Western military law:
1. Stealth
2. movement of troops in specific areas which may be considered as battle orbits, eg, airports, TV, government installations and or buildings
3. violence (although this factor doesn’t have to be considered resulting in violence or bloody skirmishes between loyal to government troops and rebel troops, the mere threat of violence by rebel troops is a factor, i.e., coup d’état against Pres de Gaulle during the Algerian war of independence)
That’s why in theory, Gloria’s act then could have been considered a coup d’état because it had all the ingredients as above – the threat of violence coming from the Espinoza brigade from Quezon threatening to attack Malacanang if Erap didn’t resign or leave Malacanang.
In spite of those elements, I advised Tong Laurel to his group’s lawsuit against Gloria from coup d’état to mutiny per advice of military friends here because at the time of the toppling there were no known movement of troops to the important gov installations I mentioned above.
clarification: “So, given that the “mutiny” was staged in a civilian compound, coup d’état could be used and I doubt it would hold…” (but mutiny there was if mutiny it is that they are to be charged with.)
atty36252:
You forgot to mention Einstein. I understand he was a school dropout. I understand degrees were just confered on him without really going through the rigors of regular schooling.
Anna, Trillanes et al are charged with the crime of coup d-etat which everybody who is not sipsip to Gloria Arroyo say the Magdalo boys did not commit, the attributes of which you enumerated above.
I think they wanted something dramatic (coup). They sacrificed substance for form which means injustice.
I haven’t read Judge Pimentel’s ruling on the Trillanes appeal for reconsideration. If the judge’s basis of not granting it is the Jalosjos case, the comparison is faulty. Jalosjos was already in jail and sentenced guilty by the court. Does that hold up for Trillanes? Is he found guilty of the charges leveled against him? (The answer is Yes if one is using the prejudgment of DoJ Sec of (In)Justice and Assperon’s kangaroo court as the basis.)
In any case, calling it as the Rule of Law is most absurd. Passing judgment on Trillanes’s supposed inability to “walk the talk” of law is like exonerating the most incompetent lawmakers of the land whose only capital to officialdom is their popularity as celebrities. In the final analysis, blaming the voters for putting Trillanes in the senate is another instance of “blaming the victims” rather than the culprits who make life worse for every Filipino. And so, we get lost of pinpointing the real culprit.
Trillanes on the other hand may not be a lawyer but he has a bachelor’s degree from PMA and a Master’s degree from UP.
Si Fatso may have finished law at Ateneo, pero magkano ang binayad to get that degree and possibly even to the agency that passed him at the bar. Possible, because over in the Philippines we know such is not impossible especially under this administration!
Ako nga may bayaw that we suspect got his license to practice his profession by such procedure—ang lagay!
I believe Gloria will NEVER allow Trillanes to do his job as a Senator in the liberal sense of the word, going to work, attending sessions, availing of Senators’ privileges, i.e., office, staff, the equipment, etc. NEVER!
Trillanes IS a threat to Gloria’s tenancy in Malacanang.
The only way for Trillanes to perform the mandate that he received from the people is for Gloria to be ousted and the whole setting configured according to the Rule of Law.
Gloria has control of the courts, the military, the justice system in general… therefore she has the last say.
All these posturings of gov that they leave things up to the court because there’s rule of law is plain bullshit.
There is no rule of law right now! Just look at all those politicos and cabinet members doing everything to turn the law around in the ZTE deal. Just look at Abalos, the election chief, brokering, fixing a deal for the Chinese?
Good heavens, is that the rule of Law?
Susmarya naman Duren,pinapaikot mo pa kung alin ang nauna itlog o manok bago naging chicken.
Ana, that’s precisely why people complain about this much-abused phrase told no less by GMA and her minions (including those whose understanding of it is narrow because of their one-sided perception of reality). No doubt, everybody wants the rule of law. But if it dwells on rhetoric rather than on reality, if it is selectively applied rather than universally practiced, then what we have is a mis-rule of law (or misapplication of justice). It appears that what prevails in Pinas is the rule of the few – the powers that be – which they use for their own advantage but penalize others even for the slightest infraction of the law. If one of their cohorts is found guilty, the punishment is just a slap on the wrist, as others say (e.g., Gen. Garcia, Bedol), to give a semblance of so-called rule of law.
It’s tempting to coin a new phrase, “those who hold the gold make the rule.” Isn’t this most appropriate to describe GMA’s corrupt and corrupting regime?
Where was the Rule of Law when Erap was deemed to have “Constructively resigned”?
It was whelmed by the ubiquitous rule of “for the boys”.
Saludo ako kay atty. Klaro, diretso, mahirap buwagin. Napulot kaya niya yung nawawala kong ruler?
Agree! Very klaro si atty!
His conclusion is not a product of some wish-washy imagination “Diyan nakikita ang iniquity in treatment. Por kursunada ang trato, hindi by principle. So there is no rule of law, only the rule of kursunadahan.”
We saw it yesterday and we see it today.
I haven’t really read all of atty’s posts here before but have just done it – must say, his line of arguments are straightforward, not only credible but also, simply outstanding!
I think we should let duren ask more questions because his questions allow those who are not familiar with the spirit of the law (like many of us I suppose) to see through the simplicity of the law that in effect, will help other readers of Ellen’s blog to understand better where this blog stand.
Hurrah to you atty!
by others, I mean those who are pro-Gloria!
AdeBrux, Tongue,
Salamat sa inyo. Utang ko yan sa yumaong Haydee Yorac, Justice Cuevas, and all the terrors of UP. Si Justice Cuevas, hindi man ako sang-ayon sa pagka-pro-Macoy niya (remember he was installed as the chief justice of Turing Tolentino in the Manila Hotel incident), hindi ko maipagkakaila ang dunong niya.
Si Yorac, to praise her is to insult her. Kulang ang vocabulary ko para abutin ang kagalingan niya.
I came from the judiciary and was to forced to resigned after 5 years I am waiting for Senator SonnyIV to be in the session of Senate .. and i know how they work..they can’t say no to political pressure even when they are so called independent..The 11 million voters should move now..Go!!!Go!!! Rah! Rah! Rah!
Anybody here who knows where i can submit documents to the Chairman of Civil Service Committee for investigations in aid of legislations AT THE SENATE..
I DO NOT HAVE A LEGAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE AND EVENTUALLY PROSECUTE THE SHENANIGANS FROM THE ANTI-CORRUPT AND ANTI-GRAFT COURT..PLEASE HELP ME MY EMAIL ADD IS yenrotta107@yahoo.com.ph Please lang kung sino may contact sa staff ni Senator SonnyIV. I AM ALSO A SON OF A RETIRED PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHER.. THANK YOU!!!
The Administrative case i Filed at the Supreme Court is not moving.Please help me follow-up the case AM Nr. SB-04-12-P. My other email address is anahaw_8@hotmail.com …this case is already more than 3 years old.. Please help me I am a pauper litigant..
atty36252 Says:
September 22nd, 2007 at 7:26 am
AdeBrux, Tongue,
Salamat sa inyo. Utang ko yan sa yumaong Haydee Yorac, Justice Cuevas, and all the terrors of UP. Si Justice Cuevas, hindi man ako sang-ayon sa pagka-pro-Macoy niya (remember he was installed as the chief justice of Turing Tolentino in the Manila Hotel incident), hindi ko maipagkakaila ang dunong niya.
….Attorney, kaya pro-Marcos si Cuevas kasi member siya ng INC. At ang INC ay kampi kay Marcos noon. Arturo Tolentinot could have been a good Vice President or President. Magaling iyan lalo na sa constitution laws. Maliban sa pagkahilig sa babae, wala naman balitang masama sa kanya. Marcos had good men in his government too. Isa na si dating Prime Minister Cesar Virata. He’s very good in finance. Sayang lang at hindi na-appoint na Secretary of Finance after Marcos’ downfall.
Toyen,
Sen. Trillanes has an office at the Senate:
Rm 519, Senate of the Philippines
GSIS Financial Center
Rioxas Blvd., Pasay City
duren says: “it is good that the rule of law still prevails. He thought he can escape justice by being a senator.”
what rule of law are you talking about? or toying about? where is due process? where is fair justice?
is the rule of law you are saying states that the thieving administration be spared and its critics jailed?
all they incarcerated are not yet found guilty of the fabricated charges not even found in the charge sheet and not stated in the PTIR that was not made or do not want to be made public by esPWEron because he cannot support them with sufficient evidence other that EWAN information.
please try to examine your logic, my friend.
…..evidence other THAN EWAN information.
vonjovi2 Says: “Duren, Kung totoong 40 millions ang bumoto.”
ilan naman kaya dito sa 40 million na ito ang matagal nang nagpapahinga sa sementeryo?
ilan dito ang mga hindi pa ipinanganak?
Lalo na doon sa Maguindanao, Pampanga at maski na sa Negros at Cebu. Pati hindi pa ipinapanganak bumoto yata!!!
May I ask for a favor? I am overseas, and have no access to the amended information filed against Senator Trillanes.
Could somebody post it here, please?
I promise a surprise, for those who like reading legal ek-ek. There is a way to move the case out of Judge Pimentel’s hands.
Will it be interesting? The proof of the pudding is in the eating. So when I get the amended information, I will post a motion. Bahala na kayong mag-abot kay Senator Trillanes or his lawyers.
I guarantee a good legal fight. The sulsul-licitor general will have his hands full.
Thanks.
Atty36252,I’ll try to get a copy but you may write his lawyer, Atty. Reynaldo Robles, through his office at the Senate:
Rm 519, Senate of the Philippines
GSIS Financial Center
Rioxas Blvd., Pasay City
Atty. Reynaldo Robles’ e-mail: rbr@chanrobles.com
atty36252,
Thanks you. I’m looking forward to it.
I understand that one’s identity in this blog is kept confidential with the exception of some who might have become personal friends. I’m just wondering if the above attorney could tell us a little about himself without actually identifying who he is. He seems to be very knowledgeable and now based overseas. He might be a former successful practicing lawyer in Manila. Impressed ako sa mga sinusulat niya dito.
Idem hee Atty36252 … would be happy to read your opinion on the Trillanes case.
pechanco:
Ka-batch ko si Rolex Suplico and Gilbert Teodoro. Mas magaling sila, at mas mga guwapo.
Mas malakas akong uminom, at mas ma-L
malilimutin.
Di naging titser mo si Brenda sa UP law?
No. Did not have the misfortune of being under Maid Miriam.
Mabuti naman Attorney.
atty36252;
If you don’t mind,what is your legal expertise?
atty36252;
We often heard in court such as like this—-The court have found the defendant guilty beyond reasonable doubt.–
In legal jargon,what is reasonable doubt means?
Also one more question,why the language are not so simple in writing the laws and what are the rules in sense and nonsense legal writing?I appreciate it more if you can give me and answer.In the place where I live lawyers consultation fee is free for the first time,until you retain that lawyer to be your counsel.
I think you were asking the attorney what his field of specialization is such as criminal, civil, immigration. Right, Cocoy? Marami sa mga abogado ang general practicioner tulad ng mga doctor. Yes, I earlier requested our friend attorney to tell us a bit about himslef if he doesn’t mind.
Legal expertise ko? Civil and criminal litigation. Litigation means going to, and fighting in court. Karamihan sa mga ka-batch ko, are in corporate practice. Mas malaki ang pera diyan.
Frankly, ayaw ko ng corporate law, dahil madaling mambola ng businessman. Walang alam sa batas yan. Mahirap mambola ng judge, na presumably, mas may dunong sa iyo.
In a criminal case, the defendant must be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. What doubt is unreasonable?
In the Jalosjos case, if the girl is sixteen years old, hindi na statutory rape, dahil the law says below twelve. Bakit statutory rape ang tawag, dahil rape by statute – rape in the eyes of the law. There is no actual rape, dahil pumayag. But the law says hindi effective ang pagpayag ng musmos, so there is rape by definition of law, or the more fancy, statutory rape.
Now, if the defense says, akala ni Jalosjos sixteen na ang babae, and the judge says, baka nga, I have doubts about his guilt, dahil baka nga sixteen na ang bata, then that doubt is unreasonable, dahil kita namang nene pa ang hinalay. So that doubt, is unreasonable – in other words, nagpapalusot lang, namimilosopo, naniwala ka naman, at nagdudang baka nga not guilty.
What is a reasonable doubt? Spying daw si Michael Ray Aquino, dahil tumanggap ng files from a former FBI. But the files were about the Philippines. Does it sound to you like Michael Ray was spying on the US? A reasonable person will say, duda ako na gusto niyang espiyahan ang tate, dahil si Glo ang puntirya. So, were I the judge, I would have a doubt, and the doubt would be reasonable, because the facts bear out the doubt; hindi lang palusot.
Chief Justice Fernando once said the law is just English – the best preparation for law is not political science, kundi English. Of course, kung nasa Spain ka, the law is just Spanish. In other words, plain speaking is the best language of the law. Kung inaartehan na abogado ang language, para lang mukhang mahirap, at makasingil ng mas malaki. Kapag nag-pe-perorate in court, most of the times, it is to impress the client, not the judge, because you impress the judge with your pleadings (writings). Ang nag-iingay sa court, gusto lang maningil ng malaki.
As Einstein once said, if you cannot explain your discipline to a six year old, you don’t have a good grasp of it yourself. Those who deal in jargon are the mediocre ones, whether you talk of the law, physics or medicine.
When I was a freshman, ang pinakamaginhawang basahin ay mga decisions ni JBL Reyes. They were logical, concise, and contained no gibberish. Pag binola ka ng abogado, doctor, or IT guy, dahil ayaw na malaman mong kakapa-kapa pa lang sila, at hindi alam ang sagot.
atty 36252;
Attorney,what i was asking you is the definition of reasonable doubt,not the case of Jaloslos,since I could not get a clear answer from you,I define it myself,reasonable doubt attorney goes like this.Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendant’s guilt. There are very few things in this world that we know with absolute certainty, and in criminal cases the law does not require proof that overcomes every possible doubt. If, based on your consideration of the evidence, you are firmly convinced that the defendant is guilty of the crime charged, you must find him guilty. If on the other hand, you think there is a real possibility that he is not guilty, you must give him the benefit of the doubt and find him not guilty.
A reasonable doubt is not a possible doubt, a speculative, imaginary or forced doubt. Such a doubt must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have an abiding conviction of guilt. On the other hand, if, after carefully considering, comparing and weighing all of the evidence, there is not an abiding conviction of guilt, or, if, having a conviction, it is one which is not stable but one which wavers and vacillates, then the charge is not proved beyond every reasonable doubt and you must find the defendant not guilty because the doubt is reasonable.
atty 36252;
On my second question about sense and nonsense legal writing,I don’t even get a clear answer from you.The rules in legal writings goes like this;
Rule 1: The Language of the Law Is More Peculiar Than Precise. Don’t Confuse Peculiarity With Precision.
Precision is sometimes peculiarly expressed, but don’t be taken in by the peculiar expression of nonsense.
Rule 2: Don’t Ignore Even the Limited Possibilities of precision. The Price of Sloppy Writing is Misunderstanding and Creative Misinterpretation.
Some Day someone will read what you have written, trying to find something wrong with it. This is the special burden of legal writing, and the special incentive to be as precise as you can.
Rule 3: Follow the Rules of English Composition.
If it’s bad writing by the standards of ordinary English, it is bad legal writing. If it’s good writing by the standards of ordinary English, it is more likely to be good legal writing.
Rule 4: Usually You Have Choice of how to Say It. Choose Clarity.
Lack of clarity is a common but not necessary feature of legal writing. It is not an inevitable by-product of precision. Clarity depends more on how you say it than on what you have to say. As you write, keep asking, “Clear to Whom?”
Rule 5: Write Law Simply. Do not Puff, Mangle or Hide.The only thing about legal writing that is both unique and necessary is law. To simplify legal writing, first get the law right. You can’t simplify by omitting what the law requires or including what the law forbids. The better you know the law the easier to decide what law ought to go in, and what is overkill or window dressing.
Rule 6: Before you Write, Plan.
in the quiet time before you become excited with your own words-on-paper, plan. Talk over goals with those who know more law. Mull, jot, fret, read, outline. Then write. If you start from a plan, the writing will help your thinking and writing. Unplanned, the flow of words becomes a distraction.
Rule 7: Cut it in Half!
Repeat the operation until you run out of time or material. Don’t say the same thing twice inadvertently. Rewrite. Rewrite. Rewrite
Sorry for not satisfactorily answering the question. I wanted to illustrate what is reasonable, and what is unreasonable. The doubt of the jury with respect to OJ, for example, is unreasonable, because the odds of the DNA being from another person is too great. Clearly, nagpapalusot lang, pero naniwala ang jury.
The doubt is reasonable, if an ordinary man with ordinary intelligence is not convinced that the evidence is sufficient. People can slant their understanding of definitions, so I tried to illustrate. In the case of the OJ jurors, they said that their doubt was reasonable; that despite DNA evidence, baka ibang tao daw ang gumawa, or that maybe, the police planted the evidence (despite lack of basis for believing that the evidence was planted).
So kung mas naninawala ang judge sa improbable kaysa sa obvious, and sustains a doubt based on the improbable, then the doubt is unreasonable.
Sorry Cocoy, I don’t follow your rules. I haven’t even read them until this post.
You apparently know a lot, and the questions from you are not an inquiry but a challenge. I failed the challenge.
I will try to inform other people. You, I have nothing new to offer you. You know the answer to your own questions.
This is not sharing, this is a throwdown, as Bobby Flay says. I only do throwdowns in court.
Hi atty3652,
Pretty good exposé up there. Appreciate your input. Thanks again.
Attorney’s specialization is in criminal and civil. Maganda iyan. In criminal litigation, walang pera kapag mahirap ang clients. It’s only lucrative if you have rich clients. OJ Simpson’s lawyers milked him a lot. Kahit sa criminal case ay depende din kung private prosecutor ka o respondent/defendant. May mga abogadong walang alam kundi mag pleading at humingi ng mas mababa o bawasan ang parusa. This kind of lawyer will just tell his poor client to admit guilt and plead for less penalty. Iyan ang dahilan kung bakit marami ang mahihirap na nakakulong kahit pa walang kasalanan. The rich often get away because of very good and high profiled lawyers for the right price. Maganda talaga ang corporate law lalo na kung malalaking company ang hawak mo. Look at former Solicitor Mendoza who is retained by Danding Cojuangco and Lucio Tan. I can’t imagine how much he gets paid for his retainer fee. Iba pa iyon mga private cases tulad kay Erap. I have enrolled in law for a few months but quit because of family and business. I was taught to remember three Ls: Languange, Logic and Law. To be a successful lawyer, you need to know the three Ls. Ang hirap lang kasi sa abogado ngayon hindi na maganda ang reputation tulad noong araw. They are as corrupt as the others. They are even called licensed thieves. Someone warned me to avoid three types of people: Politician, Accountant and Lawyer.
This question is addressed to the attorney including Cocoy: Do you suggest that the Philippines adopt the jury system?
# atty36252 Says:
September 23rd, 2007 at 2:54 am
pechanco:
Ka-batch ko si Rolex Suplico and Gilbert Teodoro. Mas magaling sila, at mas mga guwapo.
Mas malakas akong uminom, at mas ma-L
malilimutin.
Attorney, sorry for my delayed response. Ka Batch mo pala sina Suplico. Magaling din magsalita iyan sa Congress. But I’m more impressed with Escudero and even Cayetano. What do you think of Senator Gordon? Good lawyer o hanggang dada lang? Once, his mentor Justice Cuevas made a negative comment about Gordon telling him to go back to law school. Ma-L ka din pala. Allow me to make correction then: A law student or lawyer should know four not three Ls including the abovementioned L.
I would prefer to plead before a judge. A jury is composed of ordinary individuals, like you and me. There will be times when individuals get emotional, like the OJ jury, where they decided on the basis of perceived race grievances, not the evidence.
I am not saying that ordinary men cannot be rational, but a judge has had a lifetime of parking his emotions and listening to reason. So a judge will be less prone to emotions than one, who, perhaps is trying his first case as a juror.
Mahirap piliin who will be rational and who will be emotional, let alone doing it twelve times (number of jurors). But a judge, wala ka nang gagawin. His whole life, he has been trying to rational. The mere desire to seek a judgeship shows a certain temperament.
Of course, there will always be the exception, and a judge may be emotional, even cantankerous, like one who used to preside in a branch of the RTC QC. But that is the exception; and you bet with the odds, not against it.
Rational ba si Makati RTC Judge Oscar Pimentel sa petition ni Sen. Trillanes?
“Rational ba si Makati RTC Judge Oscar Pimentel sa petition ni Sen. Trillanes?”
No. Obviously, predetermined and decision, not based on principle. In general, maraming judge na ma-prinsipyo, at rational. They do not get to handle cases like Trillanes, because, precisely, ayaw ng mga gago ang hindi nila kayang controlin. Yung may prinsipyo, usually, nababaril; I’m sure you’ve read the reports on extra-judicial killings.
I must admit, reading decisions nowadays is not like reading decisions from JBL Reyes, Alejo Labrador or Claudio Teehankee.
You’ve got people like Dante Tinga; he deserves his last name tinga. Walang carne (substance) ang mga sinusulat.
The rotten justice system can be partly blamed to crooked politicos. Political pressure and color of money are key factors in high profile cases like Sen. Trillanes. We don’t expect justice under the corrupt Arroyo regime.
Attorney, am I to understand that your preference of pleading to judge is due to the so called “emotion” by the jury? I beg to disagree. A group decision is better than just one decision maker. What if the judge also becomes emotional being human like you and me? A corrupt judge can render a wrong decision. It’s easier and cheaper to buy (bribe) a judge than jury. Anyway, I respect your opinion. Why is the US and even Canada has the jury system?
Another interesting issue is between pardon and amnesty being considered for Erap by Malacanang. Nalilito ako sa dalawang terminong iyan. Both need admission of guilt and Erap is very clear on this condition that he never will admit guilt. So, how can either pardon and amnesty be applied to Erap? And before such can be considered, Erap should withdraw his motion for reconsideration that was filed.
atty36252 Says:
September 23rd, 2007 at 9:35 am
I would prefer to plead before a judge. A jury is composed of ordinary individuals, like you and me. There will be times when individuals get emotional, like the OJ jury, where they decided on the basis of perceived race grievances, not the evidence.
Re;So you are a defense lawyer? Are you a private defense or a public defender? If you are a public defender, who cares? if you plea bargaining to the judge, That’s what the public defender do! But can you let your conscience accept guilt if you client is innocent?
Since you mentioned OJ, maybe we can revisit his case. The OJ Simpson trial, Prosecutors and Defense attorneys are limited to what can be presented as evidence by existing laws. Evidence has to have been obtained according to established procedures. If the evidence has not been obtained under the accepted constraints, it can not be presented. Thus the jury does not ever hear all of the evidence gathered in a case. This is either an advantage or disadvantage depending on the perspective. Marchia Clarks’s evidence that was gathered in the acceptable way but leads to a possibility that the defendant may be innocent, she has a responsibility to let the defense attorneys know of its existence even though it may not be presented to the jury. He was freed, not as what you said- ——OJ jury, where they decided on the basis of perceived race grievances, not the evidence.–—Because the prosecutor failed to present evidence based on technicalities. You see, if OJ was your client and you plea bargain your OJ will be sent to jail. Your Job is to Defend Him if you are a defense attorney with all your talent and resources .
A jury watches a performance and has to make a judgement of the guilt or innocence of OJ based on partial information presented to it by skilled performance of Johnie Cochran, and both prosecutors and defense. Since they never hear all of the information and evidence in a case, they have to rely on their life experiences to weigh what they have heard. This works for OJ since the jury was his peers, but it works against society because OJ was freed.
Pechangco– Sorry I just get back! Here’s my opinion on your question. Let’s take the case of OJ. He could be found guilty if the jury are not his peers.
For me, Jury system is also tainted with abuse in rendering decisions. Best way, is a case heard by just the judge, who having been a lawyer or trained in law, knows the games that lawyers play in the presentation of their case. The judge is aware of all the facts in the case, including inadmissable evidence, and also, has knowledge of case law, that is, previous decisions on similarities in previous cases, to account for in rendering a decision.
In Jury system. The prosecutors job is protect the laws from criminals and defense attorneys, vigorously defending their clients from the accusation of having broken those laws, even they really committed the crimes. In these situations, the defense attorney tries to convince the jury that there is doubt that the state has accused the right individual, based on the limited evidence presented, or that their are circumstances that mitigate the actions of the accused.
Atty;This is not sharing, this is a throwdown, as Bobby Flay says. I only do throwdowns in court.
Re;I am not putting you down,I am just commenting from some of your comments that goes like this—-pechanco:-Ka-batch ko si Rolex Suplico and Gilbert Teodoro—–# atty36252 Says:
September 22nd, 2007 at 8:54 pm
May I ask for a favor? I am overseas, and have no access to the amended information filed against Senator Trillanes.
Could somebody post it here, please?
I promise a surprise, for those who like reading legal ek-ek. There is a way to move the case out of Judge Pimentel’s hands.
Will it be interesting? The proof of the pudding is in the eating. So when I get the amended information, I will post a motion. Bahala na kayong mag-abot kay Senator Trillanes or his lawyers.
I guarantee a good legal fight. The sulsul-licitor general will have his hands full.
Thanks.
Attorney;I think it is unethical for you to comment such as like this,for the reason,that they already have some lawyers working on their cases.Your statement is insult to them thinking that they are not doing their job,thinking that you are better than them,thinking that you have such power to move the case from Judge Pimentel hands.Do you think those lawyers will be happy to read your comment?
cocoy:
What I mean is, I have an idea. Will it be a good one, you decide when you read it. Same goes to the lawyers of Trillanes, when somebody gives the post to them. They may adopt it, or totally ignore it as silly.
I had no intention of indicating power on my part. Masama na pala yung trying to contribute an idea. I thought that is what people do, brainstorm. It is possible that I may not have thought of what another thought, so I like to discuss with others. That is what we used to do in law school, kaya mahilig uminom ang mga law student – well not all, maybe barkada ko lang. So ito, parang virtual inuman, with the lawyers and the gang here.
Remember I said it will be a good fight. I did not say it will be a cinch.
I never thought discussing a case would be considered unethical. If I went straight to Trillanes at sinulot ko siya, then it would be unethical.
I am a defense lawyer, yes. No, wala ako sa public defense. Wala rin akong nilaglag na cliente.
When I said plead before a judge, meaning argue magsumamo. That is the legal term. Kaya ang papers filed before a court are called pleadings. That is not plea bargaining. Iba yon.
pechanco:
Mas murang bumili ng jury kaysa Judge. Ask John Gotti’s lawyers. Of course na-convict, but after many acquittals; kaya nga teflon don. The prosecutors couldn’t make the charges stick.
Remember Untouchables starring Kevin Costner? Totoo yon. Nabili ni Capone ang jury.
Each system has its good and bad points. Nasabi ko lang ang preference ko. I would rather take my chances with a JBL Reyes or Learned Hand than with a compassionate set of twelve people, whether depensa ako or prosecution.
pechanco:
Pardon is issued by the president, on a single individual. Amnesty is a law for a class of individuals – example, patawad lahat ng umalsa laban sa gobyerno from 19xx to 2007, whether kaliwa, kanan, or in between.
Both need an admission of guilt, because you apply for it. A good example of amnesty, not in the criminal sense, is the Reagan amnesty for TNTs – lahat ng TNT who were physically in the US before Jan 1, 1982, patawad; may green card kayo, regardless kung tumawid ng Mexico, nag-jumpship na Pinoy, etc.
Judge Oscar Pimentel of Makati RTC Branch 148 junked Trillanes’s motion for reconsideration, saying that the senator’s election did not afford him special privileges.
He cited the Supreme Court’s decision to deny former congressman Romeo Jalosjos’s petition to attend House sessions after his conviction on child rape charges.
Paano naging judge si Pay-me and tell kung hindi niya alam ang pagkakaiba ng kaso ng dalawa.
Kay Jalosjos talagang umalama ang bayan dahilan sa heinous crime niya. Kay Trillanes minahal siya ng bayan dahil nakipaglaban siya laban sa HEINOUS REGIME
Atty,
But in Europe, it is inconceivable that a major crime not be tried by a jury. It is the other way around, many accused ask for a jury trial to prevent the faintest possiblility of bias by a judge even if the said judge is a member of a panel of 3 judges.
I don’t know if the background of the judges/magistrates has anything to do with the belief that they might be faintly biased.
There are two types of law schools in France: law school and school for magistrates.
The first one produces the usual legal advocates solicitor, barrister, defence lawyer for your common criminal, etc.
The second which is called the institute/school for the magistrature (école de la magistrature) study law and will be in the service of the State and for the State; this school produces future members of the corps of prosecutors and judges in the justice system.
While both studied French law, Napoleon Code and all the legal kaboodles, they are distinct from one another and each of these “men” of the law (as they call them in France), are totally separated by education, training and function from the time the leave their respective schools.
A solicitor, barrister or advocate cannot join the magistrature without going through the appropriate school for magistrates mill and vice versa.
Thanks attorney for your responses. If the jury is cheaper, then kaunti lang ang ibinibigay sa mga juror at ang judge mas malaki. Is that what you mean? Are jurors also corrupt? I’m sure some people like Cocoy who are based in the US have been called to jury duty one time or another. Have they ever been approached by either the defendant or complainant to give a favorable decision in exchange for some monetary or material reward?
Regarding the pardon and amnesty, okay both need admission of guilt; but Erap has made it clear that he will never admit guilt. Now, he’s open to absolute pardon if only because of his ailing old mother. Gusto na niya daw makasama ang kanyang ina na maaaring tawagin ng Lord anytime. If I were Erap, I would swallow my pride and accept the pardon. My love for my mother is above all.
Eto naman si Ramos nagsalita na. Hindi daw puwedeng ma-pardon si Erap habang nasa proseso pa ang kaso. He argued that the case should end first meaning the judicial process is complete before a pardon can be granted. Mukhang ayaw ni Tabako na makawala si Erap. O baka naman pa-importansiya siya dahil hindi siya kasama sa negotiation?
AdeBrux, your explanation of the French law system and school looks similar to that of Canada. I’m still confused as to the terminologies like Barrister. In Canada, there are consultants like immigration consultants that need to be licensed. Para bang paralegalist na tawag sa US. Sa Pilipinas, ang alam ko lang legal assistant o legal secretary.
Msbuti naman at ipinapaliwanag niyo dito ang mga terminolgy ng law.
pechanco:
Madali namang mag-final ang decison para magka-pardon si Erap. I-withdraw ang appeal, and let the fifteen days lapse. That makes the decision final, because if the appeal period lapses, the decision is rendered final.
I agree, family comes first. Puede pa namang maglingkod bilang statesman. Between Ramos and Erap, despite the conviction, I’m sure mas may influence sa taong bayan si Erap.
Hi Pechanco,
In the UK:
If a case goes before the tribunal/court, a defendant or a plaintiff will need a barrister; the barrister is the lawyer who goes before the court to defend in either civil or criminal case or to prosecute for the plaintiff (in civil litigations).
The solicitor is the lawyer that prepares the entire case file for both commercial or penal cases for the barrister who is the lawyer qualified to appear before a court. Often the defendant or plaintiff gets to meets his/her barrister only in court as said defendant’s or plaintiff’s case is prepared totally by a solicitor.
In France all lawyers who go to court on behalf of a defendant or a plaintiff are supposed to be “membres de barreau” or members of the bar; they handle both commercial and penal cases; however we have another kind of lawyer called “avocat” or “avoué” (advocate or lawyer) who are also lawyers but are not members of the bar and cannot present cases before a tribunal/court (much like the solicitor in the UK).
But in France, an “avoué” usually takes care of commercial litigations, contracts, gives legal advice but are not qualified to handle penal cases and therefore not qualified to appear in court on behalf of a client.
The notary public in France is not the same as the US notary public in the sense that the latter could also be a lawyer and has a degree in law from a university or a law school. “Notaires” as they are called go to a specific school for would be notary public and are especialized as such – there are only a given number or quota for the notary public profession in France, in other words, a notary public has to retire to be replaced.
All real estate transactions are required by law to be coursed through a notary public, the act serves as guarantee for both buyer and seller parties to the genuineness of the deed, the notary public is paid a percentage (between 2 and 4%) of the cost of the propery shared equally by buyer and seller; also almost all huge contracts are normally coursed through a notary public.
Thanks a lot, AdeBrux. Perhaps I should limit my question to only Canada. It looks like Canada’s system is patterned to that of UK and Europe. In Canada, one needs not to be a lawyer to be a notary public. Anyone can be one. Sa US yata, kailangan isang abogado ang notary tulad sa Pilipinas. There are new and unsuccessful lawyers in the Philippines who earn their living mostly on notary service. All they need is a small office or table outside of the City Hall premises. Wika nga ng mga abogado, basta magka-boundary lang okay na. That’s the sad plight of our Filipino lawyers. Ang iba naman join sa NBI, Police at Military. If you’re a lawyer, I think you’re commissioned as captain as the lowest rank.
Atty;These are all your comments;
I am a defense lawyer, yes. No, wala ako sa public defense. Wala rin akong nilaglag na cliente.
When I said plead before a judge, meaning argue magsumamo. That is the legal term. Kaya ang papers filed before a court are called pleadings. That is not plea bargaining.
The more you are making irrelevant statements the more I am convince that you are not really a lawyer,A WANNABE, maybe!–You said you are a defense lawyer, why you file pleadings in court? Sus Ginoo! Alam mo ba ang pinagsasabi?
You don’t even know a legal jargon you are saying.–
PLEADINGS– Ang ibig sabihin,– is the beginning stage of a lawsuit in which parties formally submit their claims, The plaintiff submits a complaint stating the cause of action — the issue or issues in controversy. The defendant submits an answer stating his or her defenses and denials. The defendant may also submit a counterclaim stating a cause of action against the plaintiff. Pleadings serve an important function of providing notice to the defendant that a lawsuit has been instituted concerning a specific controversy or controversies. It also provides notice to the plaintiff of the defendant’s intentions in regards to the suit.
Pleadings are the written statements of the respective claims and defenses of the parties submitted to the court for appropriate judgment. Rule 6, Section 1, Rules of Civil Procedure (Philippines)
Don’t take my word for it. Ask other lawyers. Papers filed in court are called pleadings.
Yes,pleadings are a written statements filled in court by the prosecutors and the defense.–the prosecutor filled the charge or the complaint.—-since,you mention that you are a defense lawyer you filed an answer stating your defenses and denials. You may also submit a counterclaim stating a cause of action against the plaintiff.—
You should stated to me that you are defense lawyer, you must be accurate in your statement on the rule:6 that mention to you above.A lawyer thinks before they write.That is the importance of the rule of legal writing which you never encountered in law school as you said,I don’t know which law school you went but,in every law student in college you must have to take that lesson.
Atty36252: Don’t take my word for it. Ask other lawyers. Papers filed in court are called pleadings.
******
You bet, and I have difficulty sometimes translating this in Japanese as we have definite characters depending on whether the case is for the criminal or civil court. I am actually now in the process of preparing a dictionary of legal terms in Japanese and Tagalog in between interpretation jobs for the police, court and the TV.
Atty; When I said plead before a judge, meaning argue magsumamo.
The defense don’t plea before the judge.
A plea is a deal that you as defense attorney works with the prosecutor not to the judge. After you agree on a plea, you fills out a Tender of Plea Form. The Tender of Plea Form explains to the judge what you and the prosecutor think is a good solution for the case. You will list all the “terms” that they are proposing. The terms listed on the form are the things that you will have to do if you want to resolve your case without going to trial. Now, when you make a plea for your client you must give up your client right to a trial and remain silent.You are a defense attorney and you can’t defend your client anymore from the barrage of the prosecutor because you let your client plea.
When I said plead before a judge, meaning argue magsumamo.Tanong ko sa iyo.Kung defense lawyer ka bakit ka magsumamo before a judge? Pag nagsumamo ka ang ibig sabihin ay inamin mo na na guilty ang cliente mo sa halip na ipagtangol ko.
I am a defense lawyer.Wala rin akong nilaglag na cliente ang sabi mo. Hindi ba paglaglag ng cliente ang pag susumamo before a judge.–Guilty na kaagad ang cliente mo at sa kulungan ang bagsak kahit walang kasalanan.Kaya walang akong bilib at naniniwala na abugado ka talaga.
When you appear before a judge, and argue, it is called pleading, because you plead before the majesty of the law. Even if your client pleads not guilty, arguing that he is not, by way of motions to quash (dismiss) or filing a brief (argmuent on paper – summation sa US), it is still considered pleading.
So walang connection ang term na pleading to the court and the plea of guilt. Those are separate concepts.
Read some Supreme Court decisions, and you will encounter the phrase ” defendant pleads the defense of alibi” (wala siya doon sa crime scene)or “defendant pleads the defense of justification” (killing your wife’s lover while caught in the act).
So, like earlier said, pleading is arguing. But, because you argue before the majesty of the law, you plead. Ganoon din noong kabataan ko, when I reasoned out with my Dad, I did it respectfully, dahil Tatay yon. So ang argument ko sa Tatay ko ay isang ding species of pleading.
Ang mahirap, ang reference point mo, US stuff, while I am relating Philippine law.
You made your point, you don’t think I am a lawyer. So let us agree to disagree. To you, I am atty_wannabe. To the others, I am atty36252. I will create another account, so that when I respond to you, I will respond as atty_wannabe.
Wala kang bilib sa akin as a person. Fine. I cannot and don’t intend to change that. Talk to people of your caliber, then. Don’t waste time on this atty_wannabe.