Hubert Webb (VIZCONDE Massacre) et al: "Not Guilty" [Merged Threads]

[oliver1013]

Tangnang NBI puro mock raid sa sauna bath Lang magaling para libre popoy.

[ab_initio]

While it may be that the December 14, 2010 SC thoroughly discussed why Webb et.al are entitled to a verdict of acquittal, the more exhaustive dissenting opinion of J. Villarama merits an approval in giving credence to the decisions of the lower and appellate courts.

Here's J. Villarama's dissent:

More important, Alfaro’s testimony was sufficiently corroborated on its material points, not only by the physical evidence, but also by the testimonies of four (4) disinterested witnesses for the prosecution: White, Jr., Cabanacan, Gaviola and Birrer.*

The decision did not discuss head-on why the testimonies of the four others should be jettisoned.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprud..._villarama.htm

[olidotcom]

question.... why was there no fingerprints mentioned on the site? wala ba daw nakuha? or di ko lang nabasa... i already backreaded the thread from the start...

[Altis6453]

While it may be that the December 14, 2010 SC thoroughly discussed why Webb et.al are entitled to a verdict of acquittal, the more exhaustive dissenting opinion of J. Villarama merits an approval in giving credence to the decisions of the lower and appellate courts.

Here's J. Villarama's dissent:

More important, Alfaro’s testimony was sufficiently corroborated on its material points, not only by the physical evidence, but also by the testimonies of four (4) disinterested witnesses for the prosecution: White, Jr., Cabanacan, Gaviola and Birrer.*

The decision did not discuss head-on why the testimonies of the four others should be jettisoned.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprud..._villarama.htm

I believe the majority opinion did discuss it.

The supposed labandera who said she saw Hubert Webb with the bloody shirt was employed by the family only until April 1991 (as certified by her agency). The murders happened in June or July of that year which means that she could not have been there.

As for the security guards, the Court pointed out inconsistencies like why they would distinctly remember Webb to have entered the subdivision yet not log it in their journal as per SOP. Also, their recall of the vehicles which came into the subdivision was called into question.

As to Birrer, I don't recall anymore. But, if she testified as to overhearing Biong talking to someone over the phone, isn't it that the most it can prove is that Biong was speaking to someone? It doesn't prove the identity of the caller nor the tenor of the conversation as she wasn't privy to what the other party was saying.

[oliver1013]

In other words may duda..pag meron kahit konting pag dududa e wala na yun

[Monseratto]

The witnesses were unreliable since they may have also been coached. Otherwise they have SELECTIVE MEMORIES. They gave very vivid account yet where unable to recall what they did on other days...

But Cabanacan's testimony could not be relied on. Although it was not common for a security guard to challenge a Congressman’s son with such vehemence, Cabanacan did not log the incident on the guardhouse book. Nor did he, contrary to prescribed procedure, record the visitor’s entry into the subdivision. It did not make sense that Cabanacan was strict in the matter of seeing Webb’s ID but not in recording the visit.

On cross-examination, however, Gaviola could not say what distinguished June 30, 1991 from the other days she was on service at the Webb household as to enable her to distinctly remember, four years later, what one of the Webb boys did and at what time. She could not remember any of the details that happened in the household on the other days. She proved to have a selective photographic memory and this only damaged her testimony.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprud...389.htm#_ftn51

[Altis6453]

The witnesses were unreliable since they may have also been coached. Otherwise they have SELECTIVE MEMORIES. They gave very vivid account yet where unable to recall what they did on other days...


http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprud...389.htm#_ftn51

That's just it.

It would appear that the witnesses were coached into saying what they testified to in open court.

I also find it quite hard to believe that the maid recalled that particular incident in great detail and testified before the trial court about it almost four years after the murders occurred.

[_Qwerty_]

yan ang nakakatakot dito sa atin.. nag pro produce nang mga witness na hindi naman totoo just to convict someone and to close the case.. fabricated lahat.. hayyyyy

[shadow]

as I've said no need to discuss yun alibi ni Hubert. yun burden of proof palang ng prosecution eh bulok na, they can't back up their accusation so hinde na kailangan ng alibi.

go NBI!!!

[oliver1013]

So who's the top dog the ex Bf of Alfaro is talkin about?

[vinj]

Here's another (Father Bernas)

Fr. Bernas on SC decision on Webb case
By Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J.
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 02:55:00 12/17/2010

Filed Under: Crime and Law and Justice, Judiciary (system of justice), Legal issues
Most Read
I have read the ponencia of Justice Roberto Abad and the concurring opinion of Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales.

I must say that at least two things impressed me about what they have written, and these have created in my mind what I would call reasonable doubt about the guilt of Hubert Webb. This, even with the dissenting opinion of Justice Martin Villarama.

First, I am particularly impressed by their discussion of the tainted credibility of the prosecution’s star witness. I, too, would tend to doubt the truth of her claim.

Second, I find their evaluation of Webb’s alibi credible. I realize that lawyers usually say that alibi is the weakest evidence, but it can also be strong evidence when supported by established facts.

I recall that the court rejected the alibi in the Larrañaga case where the accused had claimed that he was in Quezon City when the crime was committed in Cebu.

But the Webb case seemed very different. He claimed to be in the United States; he had foreign airline records to prove it; and he also had Philippine and US immigration records to support his claim. These are not easily manufactured or bought.

Considering all these, I asked myself how I would vote in the case if I were the judge.

My instinct is to say that I would rather have a guilty person go free than to have an innocent person suffer life imprisonment, especially if that person has already spent 15 years of his youth in detention.

I would agree with the statement on the last paragraph.

[wowiesy]

yan ang nakakatakot dito sa atin.. nag pro produce nang mga witness na hindi naman totoo just to convict someone and to close the case.. fabricated lahat.. hayyyyy

yan ang isang reason kung bakit napaka important ng CSI / SOCO... at dahilan din para mag invest ang DILG (under ba sa kanila to because of PNP?) or DOJ (dahil sa NBI?) or dapat dalawang group pa para may redundancy to constantly improve this...

kahit honest and well meaning ang tao, the testimony given by any person can always partially subjective... evidence, physical evidence lang talaga, na dumaan sa scientific analysis ang syang tanging objective sa ganitong mga kaso....

[ooba99]

Ah kasi winala ung evidence na semen..

saktong sakto noh?
kung kelan pinayagan sila magpa dna testing kelan nmn nawala o_O

biruin mo kung nag negative un.. labas ang utot ng NBI

pero nung 1st trial rineject ung dna testing nandun pa daw ung evidence

Hmmm... sa pagkakaalam ko, in this case, significant lang ang result ng contemplated DNA testing kung positive ang result, meaning if there is a match to anyone of the accused. Kapag negative ang DNA match, this does not mean Hubert et al. did not commit the crime.

[Monseratto]

I think PAO Acosta may be threading in thin ice. The SC said they can no longeer file a motion for reconsideration. And for her supposed new witnesses, I hope they are for real and not another Alfaro...

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/video/nat...jessica-alfaro

Prosekusyon nanindigang credible witness si Jessica Alfaro

Determinado ang hepe ng Public Attorneys Office o PAO na si Atty. Persida Acosta na ipaglaban ang kaso ni Lauro Vizconde. Hinahanda na ng kanilang legal team ang motion for reconsideration na kanilang ihahain bago matapos ang buwan.

Full force ang prosekusyon kasama ang dating director ng NBI na si Mariano Mison at ang iba pang mga nag-imbestiga sa Vizconde massacre halos 20 taon na ang nakararaan.

Nanindigan sila na credible witness si Jessica Alfaro, ang nagdiin kina Hubert Webb.

“Pumupunta siya du'n dahil parang magpinsan kami. Hindi dahil na asset siya. Inaalala niya 'yung anak niya. Sabi niya sa'kin nakikita ko si 'Taba', siya 'yung patay eh. Siya ‘yung si Jennifer. Nakunsensiya siya,” ani Jun Nombres, dating NBI agent at kababata ni Jessica Alfaro.

Sabi naman ni Acosta, mula nang maabsuwelto si Webb at iba pang kasama, 5 testigo na ang lumapit sa kanila para patunayang nasa Pilipinas si Webb nang maganap ang krimen. Taliwas ito sa alibi na nasa Amerika si Webb.

Isa sa mga testigo ang ka-basketball ni Webb na anak ng dating justice. Posible raw isumite bilang supplement ng mosyon ang mga bagong testimonya.

“Nakukunsiyensiya dahil parang wala na'ng pag-asa. Sabi ko, 'huwag po kayong mag-alala, nakaka-inspire po ang tawag niyo,'” ani Acosta.

Kaya para sa mga Vizconde, hindi pa sarado ang kaso.

Naniniwala ang kampo ng mga Vizconde na malakas ang kanilang ebidensiya pero handa raw silang idagdag ang testimonya ng mga bagong testigo kung kinakailangan para segundahan ang testimonya ni Jessica Alfaro.

Ayon naman sa abugado ng mga Webb na si Atty. Demi Custodio, hindi pinapayagan sa mga naabsuweltong kaso ang motion for reconsideration dahil maituturing itong "double jeopardy" na ipinagbabawal ng batas.

Hindi na rin daw mababawi pa ang desisyon ng korte tungkol sa kinaroroonan ni Hubert Webb nang maganap ang krimen, maglabas man ng bagong testigo ang prosekusyon. Jing Castañeda, Patrol ng Pilipino

[oliver1013]

After 15 years saka naman maglalabasan mga testigo

[olidotcom]

parang nakaka-bwiset naman yan... ngayon pa sila nako-konsensya? after 15 years?!?!?! o panibagong mga asset nanaman yan ng nbi?

[roninblade]

hihirit pa ang PAO and NBI eh nakitang palpak na nga yung handling nila sa kaso.
can anybody say 'beating a dead horse'?

[chua_riwap]

May 5 raw "bagong witnesses" ang PAO. One of them says that Hubert was in country when the Viscondes were massacred.

Naglaro pa raw nga sila ng basketball.......

[olidotcom]

makano kaya 'talent fee' na maging asset?!?!?? scripted naman yan diba.. babasahin ko na lang yung script.. no need to memorize... para palaging constant ang sagot ko. tutal hindi naman hinuhuli or kinakasuhan yung 'asset' ng nbi dahil protektado nila.

[marg]

Double Jeopardy na kung kasuhan ulit si Webb. He is protected under our constitution.

Saving Face lang mga Ulol at Palpak sa PAO at NBI