Supreme Court acquits Webb, et al

[RMK711]

---

diba ang proof = facts/evidence/testimonies/documents

Yep. And then? Nalibog man tingali ka.

[Romeojin]

unsa man say ni Kris ani, daghan gyud mutuo niya.. best actress gud hehe

[masakiton]

^ They also have to show proof that the judge and the Vizcondes framed Webb for the murders. When you make that kind of accusation, it has to have proof, especially if you're accusing someone of framing another person for murder.

diba ang proof = facts/evidence/testimonies/documents

Yep. And then? Nalibog man tingali ka.

Dili ako ang nag ingon ana, ang Supreme Court mismo that's why I cited all those cases. And not just our Supreme Court, but courts all over the world. You shouldn't be asking that question here, because it can never be answered in enough detail that gives justice to the subject. If it's really bothering you so much how a Supreme Court can render a decision without judging on the facts, you should go to law school. They can't, because they aren't allowed to. It's that simple. If you want to challenge that principle, go ahead. But don't ignore the fact that Supreme Courts around the world use this principle "they are not triers of facts, but of law" and that this Supreme Court ignored their own rules which they are supposed to obey in this case.

kung sc dili allowed mo judge sa facts... then proof = facts/evidence/testimonies/documents ....ngano kailangan paman ug proof sa accusations?
dili man ka consistent sir

[RMK711]

uu
kai ingon ka

Wurag nalibog ka sa filing sa kaso sa RTC og sa appeal sa SC...

[RMK711]

unsa man say ni Kris ani, daghan gyud mutuo niya.. best actress gud hehe

Innocent si Hubert kai...

uyab na sila! Eng eng eng..

[RMK711]

To those who still think that Hubert is really innocent, try to consider this:

The police man Biong who was accused of clearing the scene of the crime of all traces of evidence, was represented by the same lawyer who represented the Webbs.

Suspicious, huh?

[sharkey360]

unsa man say ni Kris ani, daghan gyud mutuo niya.. best actress gud hehe

Check out the movie's IMDB page

The Vizconde Massacre Story (God Help Us!) (1993)

Even director Carlo J. Caparas made another Vizconde Massacre movie in 1994.

The Untold Story: Vizconde Massacre II - May the Lord Be with Us

The Untold Story: Vizconde Massacre II - May the Lord Be with Us (1994)

[sharkey360]

To those who still think that Hubert is really innocent, try to consider this:

The police man Biong who was accused of clearing the scene of the crime of all traces of evidence, was represented by the same lawyer who represented the Webbs.

Suspicious, huh?

Truly suspicious.

[bearish]

sakit kaayo ni sa side sa mga visconde. Ang maayo ani, move-on na lang sila mga visconde kay dili na jud ni malubag ang desisyon sa SC. Mosamot lang kasakit ang pamation kung hasta ang kapildihan sa balaod ug ang pagkawagtang sa iyang pamilya, magdungan ug dat-og sa iyang dughan. Wa tay labot ani nila, pero sakitan gihapon ta maghuna-huna.

Para nako, based on testimonies of the witness, I am really convinced nga sila jud ang criminals. So let it be. Incompetent or nagpaka incompetent ra ni taga SC nato. Dili baya unanimous ang votes ani, so dapat i-review nila ngano lain2x sila ug findings. How come ang uban na convinced man na guilty sila, unsa may basis nila? Dapat wala pa unta gipagawas ang desisyon kung wa pa sad nila ma find beyond reasonable doubt na innocent ang mga suspects. Dapat nag confer sila tanan, then i-convince nila ang tanan iether guilty or not. Dapat unanimous. Pero sige nalang, wa ta kabalo, mas bug-at pa nga silot ang nagpaabot kanila kaysa pagka bilanggo lang. Wa ta kabalo nga dinhi sa gawas naay mga lain tawo or lain panghitabo nga murag gaba nila. Kung pildi ta sa hustisya dinhi ning kalibutana, basin sa lain kalibutan adto sila masilotan didto.

[RMK711]

sakit kaayo ni sa side sa mga visconde. Ang maayo ani, move-on na lang sila mga visconde kay dili na jud ni malubag ang desisyon sa SC. Mosamot lang kasakit ang pamation kung hasta ang kapildihan sa balaod ug ang pagkawagtang sa iyang pamilya, magdungan ug dat-og sa iyang dughan. Wa tay labot ani nila, pero sakitan gihapon ta maghuna-huna.

Para nako, based on testimonies of the witness, I am really convinced nga sila jud ang criminals. So let it be. Incompetent or nagpaka incompetent ra ni taga SC nato. Dili baya unanimous ang votes ani, so dapat i-review nila ngano lain2x sila ug findings. How come ang uban na convinced man na guilty sila, unsa may basis nila? Dapat wala pa unta gipagawas ang desisyon kung wa pa sad nila ma find beyond reasonable doubt na innocent ang mga suspects. Dapat nag confer sila tanan, then i-convince nila ang tanan iether guilty or not. Dapat unanimous. Pero sige nalang, wa ta kabalo, mas bug-at pa nga silot ang nagpaabot kanila kaysa pagka bilanggo lang. Wa ta kabalo nga dinhi sa gawas naay mga lain tawo or lain panghitabo nga murag gaba nila. Kung pildi ta sa hustisya dinhi ning kalibutana, basin sa lain kalibutan adto sila masilotan didto.

Naa na mai dissenting opinion nga gi-post. Ang dissenting opinion mag taas pa kaysa actual decision - 88 pages vs 44 pages. Gi-detail didto ang tanan nga sayup sa majority decision.