Cpl. Daniel Smith GUILTY

[Alpha_One]

Sorry OT lang, what did she say about?

Sorry for not providing enough context. It's a comment about a series of posts made by usokpower, flagg and

...It has been clear in all criminal cases with regards to rape, a woman will not subject herself to public humilitation by describing the details of the commission of the crime of rape before a trial court full of people...

On national TV, sabi ni Kris may STD siya...

hehehehe exception yun.

[tsupermario]

A little excerpt of a Supreme Court decision on rape:

Thus, the instant rape case is one of multifarious cases where there are no identified witnesses, and where the evidence effectively boils down to the complainant's word against the accused's. However, a pronouncement of guilt arising from the sole testimony of the victim is not unheard of, so long as her testimony meets the test of credibility. This is especially true in the crime of rape the evidentiary character of which demands so much on the part of the victim — it entails her to submit to an examination of her private parts, and to subject the sordid details of her story to a public trial and against a given presumption of the accused's innocence. Hence, it is not unusual for lower courts in cases of rape to convict on the basis of the sole testimony of the victim, upon an ascertainment that she is motivated solely by the desire to have her honor avenged and for the culprit to meet his just punishment. As this Court succinctly stated in People vs. Borja, 267 SCRA 370, "a victim who says she has been raped almost always says all there is to be said."

We affirm the trial court's finding upholding the credibility of the testimony of complainant Michelle Mana and agree that her accusations bore no apparent ulterior motive other than to tell the truth and seek justice for herself.

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri...9339_1999.html

[Flagg]

...As for the Kris Aquino comment, hasn't she subject herself to enough public humiliation already?

Di pa sya umaabot sa mala-kultong status ni Mme Auring... :evillaugh

Ahihi, tama na, OT na tayo...

[Devastator]

Smith has now been turned over to the US Embassy.

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakin...ticle_id=40832

[Horsepower]

This only proves how coward these unrespectable governments are. Smith should have been assasinated instead together with his company including the driver.

[kimpOy]

sabi na nga ba scapegoat lang si smith (1 out of 4) late night inilipat...para walang buzz....

[Horsepower]

Buti pa China, pag guilty, kahit foreigner, execute agad. Dito, mismong "presidente" traydor sa bayan e.

[claRkEnt]

Remember the american found guilty of vandalism in Singapore? Punishment was caning and the US president (cant remember who was president then)requested Singapore government for leniency... wala sila nagawa. tinuloy din ang punishment.

Eh dito sa atin, justice secretary pa mismo ang hmmmmp!!!!

[Devastator]

Remember the american found guilty of vandalism in Singapore? Punishment was caning and the US president (cant remember who was president then)requested Singapore government for leniency... wala sila nagawa. tinuloy din ang punishment.

Eh dito sa atin, justice secretary pa mismo ang hmmmmp!!!!

Oh yeah, si Michael Fay and his spray can antics. Panahon ata ni Clinton nung nangyari yon. The way I see it masyadong madaling masindak ang Pinas. Syempre alam ng lahat na mahina tayo and we can't stand up to them eh gagawa ng ibang paraan para makuha yung gusto nila. I wonder what would be the worst thing the US would do kung hindi pa rin pinalipat si Smith, economic sanctions? trade embargo? Siguradong isasama itong "gusot" sa impeachment case ( again?) kay GMA next year.

[oldblue]

like what I said earlier in the thread, to appease the anger yan lang pagkulong nya dito. ngaun hindi na mainit ang issue at busy na tayo sa X'mas season, kilos na. oh well, the Americans seem to know us very well.

[Jun aka Pekto]

like what I said earlier in the thread, to appease the anger yan lang pagkulong nya dito. ngaun hindi na mainit ang issue at busy na tayo sa X'mas season, kilos na. oh well, the Americans seem to know us very well.

I read somewhere that under the terms of bilateral agreement, Smith should remain in US custody until all appeals are exhausted and that's what the current hoohas are about. Then, he'll have to transfer over to a Philippine jail. One of the articles I read said something about that jail being in Makati.

Add: It certainly won't be one of those prisons where he'll be someone's honey. It'll be safe for him to bend down and pick up the soap.

[Flagg]

This only proves how coward these unrespectable governments are. Smith should have been assasinated instead together with his company including the driver.

Ah, some bilateral agreements seem to have been conveniently forgotten... together with the basic concept of rule of law.

[claRkEnt]

even if there are legal basis for the transfer, what made it "controversial" was the TIMING!
> it was on a weekend
> long holidays ahead.
> pressure was considered (recently cancelled military exercises)

[Horsepower]

Masyado kasing dependent sa US ang government natin kaya konting pressure lang, bigay na. If they're just after AFP upgrading or equipment of arms, they should just talk with Russia, Israel, Middle East, or Europe.

[Jun aka Pekto]

Masyado kasing dependent sa US ang government natin kaya konting pressure lang, bigay na. If they're just after AFP upgrading or equipment of arms, they should just talk with Russia, Israel, Middle East, or Europe.

That's been discussed in the Philippine Defense Forums ad naseum. Practically everyone is screaming for the Philippine government to consider another source of arms besides the US who tend to have too many strings attached. Russia is certainly a good choice. Israel...... probably not except for their hardware which have no US parts.

Russia and France would be my top choices to provide upgrades for the AFP.

Philippine Defense Forum

[Devastator]

Masyado kasing bilib sa gawang US kaya yun ang nangyayari.

[chua_riwap]

'President Arroyo Did Not Know of Smith's Transfer'


Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita Sunday said President Arroyo has nothing to do with the abrupt transfer of convicted rapist Lance Corporal Daniel Smith to the US Embassy, ABS-CBN News reported.

Ermita said Mrs. Arroyo, who is at present in Baguio City with the Presidential Family, left the matter to the National Security Council. He added that the council did not even inform Mrs. Arroyo its final decision to transfer Smith to US custody.

Ermita, however, admitted that Smith’s transfer will result in better RP-US relations.

US embassy spokesman Matthew Lussenhop, meanwhile, assured that Smith remains in detention as judicial proceedings over the US serviceman’s case continue.

"He was transferred from RP custody to US custody and he remains in detention at US Embassy. Both US and RP governments agree that custody with the US until end of judicial proceedings, while jurisdiction remains with Philippines courts," he said in a text message sent to ABS-CBN.


=========================================


Di alam ni GMA na inilipat si Smith sa US Embassy? Owwwwsss.....

[explorer]

Rapist’s justice

Inquirer
Last updated 03:17am (Mla time) 01/01/2007

Published on page A12 of the January 1, 2007 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.

LIKE A HANGING, THE MIDDLE-OF-THE-NIGHT transfer of convicted rapist Daniel Smith from the Makati City Jail to the US Embassy last Friday clarifies the mind. It allows us to see what is really at stake in the whole custody issue: Not the future of Philippine-American relations, but the future of the rule of law.

We can survive as a nation without the help of the Americans, if it comes to that. But we cannot survive without the rule of law. President Macapagal-Arroyo’s decision to transfer custody of Lance Corporal Smith—without clearance from the Court of Appeals, and in direct defiance of a standing order of Makati Regional Trial Court Judge Benjamin Pozon—was an act of calculated political expediency; it was meant to please the Americans. But her hospitality did not only sacrifice national dignity at the altar of convenience; it also broke the law.

Worse, it encourages disrespect for the law. It reveals yet again the disturbing pattern of behavior—call it the impunity of incumbency—that has marked the conduct of the Arroyo administration in legal matters since the President’s crisis of legitimacy erupted in 2005. This pattern is clear to anyone with eyes to see; but for the benefit of Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Sergio Apostol, who insists on the virtues of blindness, allow us to explain it in terms even he can understand.

There is a standing order to keep Smith, the American Marine who was convicted of raping the Filipina known as “Nicole” during a tumultuous night in Subic, detained in the Makati City Jail—“until further orders from this court.”

There is an existing appeal pending with the Court of Appeals, seeking a reconsideration of its decision upholding Judge Pozon’s order. In other words, the first attempt to overturn the order was already denied.

There is a reasonable basis for the two courts’ reading of the appropriate provision of the Visiting Forces Agreement: that conviction or acquittal at the trial court level must already constitute completion of “all judicial proceedings.” To argue otherwise is to allow a convicted American soldier to remain in US custody until all appeals are exhausted, a process which can take years and a privilege which is not granted to convicted Filipinos.

Not least, there is the question of jurisdiction: The legal issue is already with the courts; the executive cannot simply shove the judges aside and insist on the course of action it likes.

Clear as daylight. But two weeks ago, Apostol already laid the predicate for the illegal midnight transfer. “We are the jailer so we can decide where to detain a convicted criminal,” Apostol said then. If the President ordered the transfer, he blithely added, the courts wouldn’t be able to do anything except “cite the executive department for contempt.”

(We have a better suggestion: The Supreme Court can disbar any lawyer who openly mocks the judiciary’s necessarily limited capacity to enforce its rules.)

Apostol’s advice—and the outrageous rationalization offered by Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno and Undersecretary Marius Corpus, who effected Smith’s transfer, that the move was in fact in compliance with Pozon’s order—betrays the true character of the Arroyo administration. It prizes power over reason, the politics of convenience over the rule of law.

It is this same administration which sought to curtail civil liberties through Presidential Proclamation 1017, cut the country’s storied legacy of free assembly short through the calibrated preemptive response policy, place public officials beyond the reach of accountability through Executive Order 464—and make a mockery of the Constitution’s direct democracy provisions by sponsoring a “people’s” initiative. (All four actions, for different reasons, have since been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.)

The same spirit of expediency animates other initiatives that will forever be associated with this administration, such as the “prejudicial questions” sleight of hand that spooked the first impeachment complaint against the President. They are all marked by the same attitude to law: What is legal is what we can get away with.

This is not the rule of law, but rapist’s justice.

[explorer]

Palace backs GI's transfer

Says President has the power
By Christine Avendaño, Leila Salaverria
Inquirer
Last updated 00:19am (Mla time) 01/01/2007

DISMISSING FRESH calls for President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to be impeached, Malacañang on Sunday backed the midnight transfer to US custody of an American Marine convicted of raping a Filipino woman.

"Yes, you can say that, we support it," Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita told the Inquirer when asked whether the Palace and Arroyo supported the decision by the interior department to hand over Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith to the US Embassy despite the absence of a specific court order.

Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez denied the handover came about because of pressure from the United States, and said Arroyo had the power to interpret and carry out Philippine treaty obligations with the United States.

He dismissed an opposition threat to file a new impeachment case against Arroyo over the issue.

Smith's transfer from the Makati City Jail, where he had been held for 25 days, to the embassy compound was carried out at past 11 p.m. on Friday. The Interior department claimed the unannounced turnover was carried out at that late hour to avoid traffic.

Checks by the Inquirer with the Makati police and with the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority showed there was no report of any traffic jam in Makati at that hour.

Gonzalez, whose opinion on the issue of custody as spelled out under the Visiting Forces Agreement paved the way for Smith's transfer, said that "the President really wanted the VFA to be implemented because that's in the law and we are bound by it."

Gonzalez defended the transfer move, saying it was "normal" for the executive to carry this out.

"When you have a treaty, that is being implemented by the Executive," he said in a phone interview.

"The court interprets the law but the President also interprets, implements and executes the law," Gonzalez said.

No Palace dictation
Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno has said it was his office which authorized the transfer.

Ermita said the Palace had left it to the departments of interior, justice and foreign affairs to implement the VFA on the matter of Smith's custody.

"We are just awaiting the report of Secretary Puno on the details of the transfer," Ermita said in a phone interview.

He stressed that what the departments did was in line with their duties.

"We don't have to dictate to them," Ermita added.

Palace interpretation
Asked to comment on the opposition the transfer had engendered, Ermita said: "Let's just wait for developments ... I'm sure the departments know how to address it."

Gonzalez said that in the legal opinion sought by the DILG, he reiterated the treaty obligations of Manila and Washington and that "the VFA should take effect."

He also said that while the Court of Appeals had not resolved the custody issue, it had stamped the word "noted" on the government petition and on an agreement signed by Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo and US Ambassador Kristie Kenney for Smith to be transferred to US custody.

"We understood it to mean we can already interpret it however we can," Gonzalez said.

Gonzalez brushed aside opposition claims that the United States pressured the Philippines to effect Smith's transfer.

No pressure
"There was no pressure on (me). I don't even talk to the Americans," he said.

He also said the executive branch did not interfere in judicial matters or undercut the authority of the Court of Appeals.

"We are not intervening in judicial matters. That's why all these processes were filed with the CA," he said.

He said he considered the issue closed and did not expect the Court of Appeals to issue another resolution on the matter.

Gonzalez also said the issue could not be used as a basis for impeaching the President.

"It's not an impeachable offense, but if you think it's an impeachable offense, then you file an impeachment case," he said.

[Flagg]

Yung katangahan ng Inquirer knows no bounds...

...There is a reasonable basis for the two courts’ reading of the appropriate provision of the Visiting Forces Agreement: that conviction or acquittal at the trial court level must already constitute completion of “all judicial proceedings.”

Does this mean that any legal proceedings from the trial court level up to the Supreme Court are not "judicial proceedings"?

Ano ba ibig sabihin ng word na "all"?

...To argue otherwise is to allow a convicted American soldier to remain in US custody until all appeals are exhausted, a process which can take years and a privilege which is not granted to convicted Filipinos...

No law is perfect, that's why even constitutions can be amended. The fact remains that the Nicole incident happened under the present set of laws. The need to correct abovementioned inequity must be satisfied... however, it should not prejudice the concept of double jeopardy (the right of any person to not have any law applied to themselves retroactively - which, by the way, is enshrined in OUR constitution).

To invoke the above quoted item in the present would be the same as saying:
12% VAT pala dapat e, dapat mag-collect tayo ng extra 2% from when nag-umpisa ang 10%VAT, tapos 12% noong wala pang VAT... ad nauseum to the time of Rajah Soliman. Now who would want that?

So this time, Smith goes back to the US Embassy. In the future, if ever may re-negotiated VFA, someone like Smith would stay in Makati City Jail. Ganun lang po ka-simple yan. Wag po tayo mag-succumb to mob rule.