Supreme Court acquits Webb, et al

[RMK711]

---

Well, I bet the Webb's have all the money and power in the world to control the USA and have them submit a fake certification of Webb's stay in the USA and sent directly to the PH Govt. Or shall we wait for Wikileaks to show us a cable of this happening?

You don't need to control the U.S. to get this kind of fabrication going. You just need the cooperation of a few key low-ranking employees at the INS. The documentation released by the higher officials rely only on the documentation prepared by the lowly officer manning the immigration desk. And yes, that is possible and I know for a fact that it has happened.

Whether the maid and security is lying, it still boils down to Alfaro's testimony, her testimony is what's keeping the case alive.

Yes which makes it all the more important for the Supreme Court to justify its decision to make Alfaro look like a liar, even resorting to childishness by calling her names "pigeon stool"? What kind of dignified court resorts to that kind of nonsense? An American judge would hang himself out of embarrassment if he used that kind of kiddie language in his ponencia.

And as the court itself admitted, Alfaro has been a very valuable asset to the NBI even leading to the conviction of several drug lords. So there's no reason for the NBI to doubt her testimony, nor was there for the lower court. The Supreme Court not being a trier of facts, should not have been able to overturn the decision of the lower court which was in the sole position to judge the reliability of witnesses being the court that directly examined them. How the Court can rule on the reliability of a witness, without having seen the witness herself in court is beyond me. This is why in all jurisdictions that I know of, the Supreme Court is not allowed to try matters of facts, only matters of law. Apparently, the Philippines is a special jurisdiction, similar to how special children have Down's Syndrome.

If Webb has the influence and money, I bet the NBI also had the influence and power on the maid and security.

The NBI has more influence and money than the Webb? The NBI one of the most under-sourced institutions in the country? Give me a break. The Webb has the greatest influence over the maid, because uhm let's see she's their damned maid for chrissakes. And over the security guard, because he's a security guard in their subdivision for chrissakes.

Whatever happened to the maid or guard I guarantee you they are no longer working in that subdivision, so they have obviously lost something for testifying and now probably in fear of their lives at having a powerful enemy in an ex-Senator.

Just like what the SC stated, we should keep an open-mind in this case, but no matter how open my mind is, dili jud m.tugma ang testimony ni Alfaro. Why would Webb even throw a rock to break a glass door when their aim as suspects is to escape unnoticed? Or is it just to fill in a story to answer the physical evidence.

And keep an open mind about the possibility that our Supreme Court is a joke and that perhaps the perception that our justice system is garbage just might be true.

Why throw a rock to break the door? Gee whiz, the court's lack of imagination is absolutely shocking here! Maybe it's to make it appear that this was a break-in robbery as opposed to a rape by known friends of the victims? See how easy that is? If he didn't break the glass door, then the automatic presumption would be that the assailant is known to the victims, which would lead the police to the culprit much faster. In fact, this ruse may have worked, because it originally led to the police looking for a known gang in the area instead of looking for the real culprits.

EDIT, answer to the bolded text:

If he said it was possible, then why did he proclaim them guilty? He wasn't even sure if that's the case. There was no evidence to show that their influence and money was able to fabricate an OFFICIAL US GOVT DOCUMENT. And don't tell me Hubert swam to the USA just to evade immigrations, or he paid the US immigrations officer at the airport just to bypass being documented on his exit/entry to the USA. If so, then I pity the USA, I've always known they had the strictest immigrant entry in the world.

Hahah how naive. I can assure you it is possible to get this done and I know that it has been done. I know someone (I won't name names) who was able to get the immigration agent at the airport not to stamp his passport to make it appear that he was still in the U.S. (if you're wondering why, it's for green card minimum residency purposes). So if that is possible, I can assure you with money and influence other things are... what the lower court judge is doing is merely UPHOLDING a pre-existing doctrine laid down by no less than the Supreme Court itself. That is that uninterested third-party witnesses cannot be overturned merely by alibi, which is to be considered the weakest defense. I'm not making this up. The Supreme Court has basically overturned its own pre-existing doctrine and laid down another one. With this one case, they have changed the strength of alibi as a defense in our country, for better or worse. But no mistake about it, they have changed doctrine.

[INFRACTION]

unsa mai mga remedies pwede i avail ni Mr. Lauro Vizconde in line sa decision sa court?

[FranZeno]

You don't need to control the U.S. to get this kind of fabrication going. You just need the cooperation of a few key low-ranking employees at the INS. The documentation released by the higher officials rely only on the documentation prepared by the lowly officer manning the immigration desk. And yes, that is possible and I know for a fact that it has happened.

I doubt it happens. You're comparing apples and oranges, apples being Pinoys and oranges being Americans. Will US govt employees even risk their lives for the affairs of other countries for any amount of money?

Yes which makes it all the more important for the Supreme Court to justify its decision to make Alfaro look like a liar, even resorting to childishness by calling her names "pigeon stool"? What kind of dignified court resorts to that kind of nonsense? An American judge would hang himself out of embarrassment if he used that kind of kiddie language in his ponencia.

Just because they called her "pigeon stool" doesn't mean they're childish, because by definition she "is".

The NBI has more influence and money than the Webb? The NBI one of the most under-sourced institutions in the country? Give me a break. The Webb has the greatest influence over the maid, because uhm let's see she's their damned maid for chrissakes. And over the security guard, because he's a security guard in their subdivision for chrissakes.

Whatever happened to the maid or guard I guarantee you they are no longer working in that subdivision, so they have obviously lost something for testifying and now probably in fear of their lives at having a powerful enemy in an ex-Senator.
And keep an open mind about the possibility that our Supreme Court is a joke and that perhaps the perception that our justice system is garbage just might be true.


Why throw a rock to break the door? Gee whiz, the court's lack of imagination is absolutely shocking here! Maybe it's to make it appear that this was a break-in robbery as opposed to a rape by known friends of the victims? See how easy that is? If he didn't break the glass door, then the automatic presumption would be that the assailant is known to the victims, which would lead the police to the culprit much faster. In fact, this ruse may have worked, because it originally led to the police looking for a known gang in the area instead of looking for the real culprits.

Hahah how naive. I can assure you it is possible to get this done and I know that it has been done. I know someone (I won't name names) who was able to get the immigration agent at the airport not to stamp his passport to make it appear that he was still in the U.S. (if you're wondering why, it's for green card minimum residency purposes). So if that is possible, I can assure you with money and influence other things are... what the lower court judge is doing is merely UPHOLDING a pre-existing doctrine laid down by no less than the Supreme Court itself. That is that uninterested third-party witnesses cannot be overturned merely by alibi, which is to be considered the weakest defense. I'm not making this up. The Supreme Court has basically overturned its own pre-existing doctrine and laid down another one. With this one case, they have changed the strength of alibi as a defense in our country, for better or worse. But no mistake about it, they have changed doctrine.

The NBI doesn't need money to do such, they have influence and guns. If the Webb has the greatest influence over the laundry woman, then why did she testify against them?

Yeah, keep an open-mind. So where are the evidences that claim Webb guilty? Fingerprints? Murder weapon? Keep an open-mind, let's not focus on eye-witness accounts. Keep an open-mind, when even the principal eye-witness is a drug-addict.

[jhanjhan]

we are pressuming that they were guilty, what if they were not? then the sytem has done them a great injustice. 15 years of their lives were lost due to the bumbling justice system that we have here in the philippines. Im frankly torn if they were innocent or not, but due to the lack of evidence kasi sinunog ng magaling na pulis... anyway lets be fair and alllow them benefit of the doubt. 15 years is 15 years...that's a long time, if they did commit the crime or they were accessories to the crime, in away they were already paying for it. they would always be branded as criminals and their lives are already ruined. whats really frustrating and the core of the whole thing is the justice system that we have here in the phil.

[INFRACTION]

most feel sad because we judge the case via trial by publicity.... but we need to check the facts presented by the defence

[RMK711]

I doubt it happens. You're comparing apples and oranges, apples being Pinoys and oranges being Americans. Will US govt employees even risk their lives for the affairs of other countries for any amount of money?

Yes they do, and they have. No lives are put at risk by this fabrication, since we aren't dealing with known terrorists. Obviously, if Hubert Webb were a terrorist, rather than an accused murderer, they would think twice about doing this.

Just because they called her "pigeon stool" doesn't mean they're childish, because by definition she "is".

Oh yes they are. Show me any other Supreme Court decision that uses this kind of garbage language. If what they meant to say was that she was a frequent visitor at the NBI, then they should have said she is a frequent visitor. The use of the word "pigeon stool" was calculated to make the witness appear foolish and unreliable. It's that simple. Mature people in respectable courts simply do not resort to this kind of thing. But you're entitled to your opinion.

The NBI doesn't need money to do such, they have influence and guns. If the Webb has the greatest influence over the laundry woman, then why did she testify against them?

Gee, maybe because she is convinced that Hubert is guilty and wanted to testify out of conscience despite the very real risk to her life?

Yeah, keep an open-mind. So where are the evidences that claim Webb guilty? Fingerprints? Murder weapon? Keep an open-mind, let's not focus on eye-witness accounts. Keep an open-mind, when even the principal eye-witness is a drug-addict.

Are you even fully apprised to the facts of the case? Do you even know why there are no fingerprints? Because a certain policeman made sure to clean them all up! Why would he do such a thing Because someone hired him to do so. And who I wonder would be interested in bribing a policeman to clear out all the evidence.. obviously the killer or someone very close to him, someone with power and influence. Someone who is a Senator perhaps? Wow, no leap in logic required here whatsoever...

Just because the principal eye-witness is a drug addict does not mean she is lying. It simply means she has a drug problem. That doesn't invalidate her testimony. And you might be interested to know that Hubert Webb is said to be a drug addict as well. Does that then automatically mean he is a rapist as well? After all drug addiction is highly correlated with violent crime, right?

[FranZeno]

@RMK77

And oh, I forgot to explain to you about stool pigeon. It's a formal term used for a police informer or a decoy. So it was not childish of SC to call her that, because that's what a police informer is called.

[masakiton]

sa kadto wala na uyon sa decission sa Supreme court ...
please i present ang inyo facts/evidence ... dili ang opinion/gibati

Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.

[areukiddingme]

what is happening to our justice system? kauwaw man lang tawn ta oe...mypa mag pa adopt nlng q ni angelina jolie ug brad pitt

[RMK711]

@RMK77

And oh, I forgot to explain to you about stool pigeon. It's a formal term used for a police informer or a decoy. So it was not childish of SC to call her that, because that's what a police informer is called.

Nah. It is not a formal term, though you are correct that this refers to an informant. It is considered slang and even somewhat derogatory. The court should have used the proper FORMAL, educated terminology "police informant". After all, it does not suit the dignity of the court to resort to use terms that are slang. Should you have any doubt refer to your dictionary.

What remains the same is the choice of the court in using "pigeon stool" which excites a mental picture of a pathetic person, over "police informant" which gives more dignity to the person involved. Surely you can see this?