Dear mouse,
I am in my moment of my KATAMARAN. My mind set to hibernate mode when I was planning to work in some documents. I reviewed my Law and Order “classes” in three networks where they are shown beginning three o clock up to 8:00.
The statement of one investigator in the TED FAILON case that they were not able to reenact the crime scene because the bathroom was cleaned made me exclaim, bakeet? In Bones, CSI, NCIS, they reenact the crime in the laboratories especially the bullet trajectories. Don’t they have luminol ? Luminol is used by forensic investigators to detect trace amounts of blood left at crime scenes as it reacts with iron found in hemoglobin even after the place was thoroughly cleaned.
Another statement that irked me is this:
“Maybe the helpers are right in sayiing that they had no malice. But ignorance of the law excuses no one. The problem remains. You can’t do that. You have to preserve the integrity of the scene of incidents for purposes of further investigation.”
Not with obstruction of justice law.
Section 1 of presidential decree 1829 (it is not a Republic Act)as cited in the newspaper.
Section 1. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period, or a fine ranging from 1,000 to 6,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any person who knowingly or willfully obstructs, impedes, frustrates or delays the apprehension of suspects and the investigation and prosecution of criminal cases by committing any of the following acts.
I may be mistaken but look where the case of the househelpers fall.
(a) preventing witnesses from testifying in any criminal proceeding or from reporting the commission of any offense or the identity of any offender/s by means of bribery, misrepresentation, deceit, intimidation, force or threats;
(b) altering, destroying, suppressing or concealing any paper, record, document, or object, with intent to impair its verity, authenticity, legibility, availability, or admissibility as evidence in any investigation of or official proceedings in, criminal cases, or to be used in the investigation of, or official proceedings in, criminal cases;
(c) harboring or concealing, or facilitating the escape of, any person he knows, or has reasonable ground to believe or suspect, has committed any offense under existing penal laws in order to prevent his arrest prosecution and conviction;
(d) publicly using a fictitious name for the purpose of concealing a crime, evading prosecution or the execution of a judgment, or concealing his true name and other personal circumstances for the same purpose or purposes;
(e) delaying the prosecution of criminal cases by obstructing the service of process or court orders or disturbing proceedings in the fiscal’s offices, in Tanodbayan, or in the courts;
(f) making, presenting or using any record, document, paper or object with knowledge of its falsity and with intent to affect the course or outcome of the investigation of, or official proceedings in, criminal cases;
(g) soliciting, accepting, or agreeing to accept any benefit in consideration of abstaining from, discounting, or impeding the prosecution of a criminal offender;
(h) threatening directly or indirectly another with the infliction of any wrong upon his person, honor or property or that of any immediate member or members of his family in order to prevent such person from appearing in the investigation of, or official proceedings in, criminal cases, or imposing a condition, whether lawful or unlawful, in order to prevent a person from appearing in the investigation of or in official proceedings in, criminal cases;
(i) giving of false or fabricated information to mislead or prevent the law enforcement agencies from apprehending the offender or from protecting the life or property of the victim; or fabricating information from the data gathered in confidence by investigating authorities for purposes of background information and not for publication and publishing or disseminating the same to mislead the investigator or to the court.
There was another statement that they do not need a warrant to arrest because there is no crime
Say it again please. TOINKKk
I just watched the Law and Order this afternoon and a case of kidnapping murder was almost thrown out by the court because the police as not given the warrant of arrest they need to enter the place where the victims of kidnapping were being kept.
The court could only indict if the father of the victim agrees to testify and provide them the necessary information.
So pray tell why are people being arrested with force?
The Ca t
argh, sana dyan ako nahilig na panonood ng mga ganyan para my alam ako kahit konti lol kasi naman puro walang kawawaan yung mga pinapanood ko e hahaha
lee,
naging biktima rin ako ng obstruction of justice noong ako ay nasa pinas. dinemanda ko yong aking former employer. nareceive ko yong notice ng hearing, mali ang information, kaya namissed ko ang hearing.
hindi ko alam yon, hanggang di ko nabasa itong obstruction of justice.
tsk tsk yan pala ang dapat kong matutunan importante talaga
lee,
ngayon ko rin lang nalaman yan. eh di lalo na ang mga househelps di ba.
If the wife of Mr. Failon committed suicide, there is no crime committed and no obstruction of justice to speak of. The QCPD therefore has to establish first that the killing is parricide, murder or homicide before anyone could be charged for obstruction of justice. I can’t help but smile how stupid the police authorities are in handling the case.
As I see it, QCPD is getting even with Mr. Failon on account of the latter’s vocal opposition against police abuses. If they could treat Mr. Failon as they do now, I wonder how they treat the common tao who does not know anything and does not have the support of a tv/radio station.
Regarding the 1829 thing:
Yan ang sinasabi ni Renato Pacifico: PEKENG PERYODISTA.
Hahahaha…
Darn, yung guy na yun, walang tigil ang pagwawala ng comments sa FV. Heheh.
you should have watched noon yong Visconde case.
they even burned the evidence.
silver,
bakit kaya allowed siya anoh?
sa akin moderated. hehehe
try nyo din po tingnanang rights of the accused.a person must be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved…in the case hindi pa convicted and mga kasambahay so innocent pa sila..hindi dapat ganun ang treatment..one more thing with regard to pd 1829, it did talk abaout obstruction of justice pero hindi sinabi na pwede ang warrantless arrest.. try reading In Posadas vs. Ombudsman (G.R. No. 131492..thanks
Hhaha…
Ms. Cat,
Ewan ko ba. Malakas din ang tama ni Renato….
Hahaha!!
ippoh,
thank you for the info. ito nga ang intention ng blog ko. para ipakita ang maling investigation na ginagawa lalo na’t wala pang patunayan.
silver,
nakakatawa ng ang mga post niya.
Maaari at pwedeng mag-aresto ang mga pulis ng walang “warrant of arrest” kung ito lang ay nangyari ng harapan o nasaksihan mismo ang krimen o panunungaling ng mga naturang alagad ng batas.
Sa kasong ito, halatang bagsak sa Philippine Constitution ang mga pulis na umaresto. LOL
Hay ms. Cat,
Patola talaga ang mga pulis sa atin. Kakainis talaga. Arggh.
btw they did a luminol testing sa C.R. came out positive. and the slug ricochet mark they were looking for? nakita na ng SOCO.
other notes:
– kailangan atang iklian yung Miranda Rights, masyado mahaba di makabisado ng mga umaaresto. pakshet sino ba nagpahaba nun?
– ang imbestigasyon ay naguumpisa at nagtatapos sa parafin testing, kapag negative lahat atleast libre ang exfoliation, instant lambot ng kamay. jack en poy na lang pre, sigurado ang matalo siyang unggoy!
– if it’s in english and sounds cool on TV like “Obstruction of Justice” paulit-ulitin sa makukulit na media men. lol
– nasa sahig ang “marka ng bala” mahirap nga naman yumuko pag medyo malaki na ang tyan, pupusta ako payat yung nakakita ng marka.
retz,
kaya nga bawi nila yong kanilang unang statement.
Siguro dapat nating tignan din yung reason behind kung bakit ginagawa ng mga pulis ang pag-aresto sa mga helper/drivers.
Sa tingin ko maganda yun.
Kung ikaw ba sabihan na suicide ang nangyari, maniniwala ka kaagad? Pano kung si Ted Failon talaga ang pumatay sa asawa nya at sinabi nya na suicide. End of case na ba?
So pwede pala na halimbawa, may asawa ako, then in a heated argument, napatay ko sya, sabihin ko lang na suicide yung nangyari at ayusin ko yung crime scene, tapos na ang kaso? Wala ng imbestigasyon?
Di ba ganun naman ang dapat gawin ng pulis? Kase lahat ng andun sa bahay or malalapit sa mga involved ay “suspect”.
Isn’t it suspecting na kung namatayan ka ng asawa, maiisip mo pa bang bumisita sa mga driver/maid mo na nakakulong? Sa tingin ko ang natural na reaction ng tao is to be mourning and visiting driver/maid is the least priority. Ngunit si Ted Failon, ayun sa presinto gustong ilabas yung drivers and maids nya. For what reason?
Maybe:
1. Naawa sya sa mga katulong/driver na walang kasalanan?
2. To prevent them from giving additional statements?
3. To make statements na tugma sa mga nabitawan nyang statements?
Pansin nyo kung nanood kayo ng news, iba-iba yung mga statements nina Ted, ung katulong and yung Pamela (kapatid nung asawa ni Ted)
Sabi ni Ted, sumigaw sya sa katulong para kunin yung susi para mabuksan yung kwarto.
Sabi naman nung katulong, bumaba daw si Ted mismo para kunin yung susi.
At sa parehong statement, wala pa si Pamela sa scene kase daw pumunta ng bangko.
Pero sabi ni Pamela sa exclusive interview sa ABS CBN, sya daw yung unang lumapit sa katawan ni Trina Etong kase si Ted hindi makalapit. Tsaka nila dinala sa ospital.
Yun pa lang malinaw na may mali. At kaduda duda?
Ang akin lang, idetain dapat yung mga katulong/driver para hindi na makapagcorroborate ng statements kung meron mang pinagtatakpan.
Isa pa tong ABS-CBN, parang minomold na ang public opinion, lahat ng inilalabas na video in support sa “suicide claim” at yung pag aresto. Sana naman maging patas lang.
Kung kayo yung mga pulis ano gagawin nyo?
Ano ba ang dapat na ginawa? Aber?
Kung may foul play man, pag nakapag usap usap yung mga may alam eh di makakabuo na ng coherent statement to support the suicide theory. Isa na namang kaawa awang kaso.
Hindi ako anti-Ted Failon, in fact bilib ako sa galing nyang magdeliver ng news. Ang gusto ko lang ay maging patas yung pagtingin sa kaso.
Yun lang. =)
exactly some of my thoughts Cathy, I am at a loss as to the extent of malfunction, dysfunction, and utter lack of professionalism that has been taking place..
one commenter at FV, which made me laugh a bit, went as far as jokingly saying that The CIA was going to hire the maids for doing such a good job at cleaning up, that even the cops were stumped..
In any case, the greater issue, I believe is the ability of the police to do its job.. not just in investigations, but in kidnappings, as well as extrajudicial killings, human and civil rights violations, etc… The manner by which they conduct themselves seems to me, in many parts of The Philippines, as bordering one characteristic as part of a failed state, where the state can no longer protect and serve its own citizenry.. clearly, if this is our police in action, in a sporadic sense, there are parts of The Philippines on the border of a failed state..
So pwede pala na halimbawa, may asawa ako, then in a heated argument, napatay ko sya, sabihin ko lang na suicide yung nangyari at ayusin ko yung crime scene, tapos na ang kaso? Wala ng imbestigasyon?
first there should be thorough investigation before installment statements are released to the public.
That shows how compassionate he is to small people.
Would you not visit them if the doctor tells you that the situation of your wife is still wait and see?
Bakit porke maid lang sila,hindi mo sila iisipin lalo na alam mong nasangkot lang sila at walang kasalanan?
Depositions and affidavits are made individually.
There is no way by which they will be consistent as to the use of words and the chronological order of the events.
kaya nga sa court hearing, inuulit ito pag tanong. pag napatunayan na this was taken under duress it can be thrown out as evidence.
nick,
agree.
you may not publish this comment but i’d like to share my thoughts.
if i were the spouse of the person seen bathing in his/her own blood with a gun seen somewhere in the scene, my first reaction would be to take the person to the hospital whether he/she is dead or not because my first hope would be that he/she is still alive. i would not think of telling anyone in the household to clean up, or pick the gun up and clean it to be surrendered later on to the police because my mind would be flooded by the spouse’s safety first and foremost. nothing else. my actions would be directed at saving my spouse’s life, even if it may have been evident that he/she is dead.
in all honesty, i refuse to believe that ted killed his wife or willed to kill his wife or even planned to kill his wife. for a man who is a public servant, it is not expected at all, not even thought of at all.
however, being a fan of CSI and an avid reader of such authors as Robin Cook and Mary Higgins Clark, i tend to imagine things like … maybe the man left early in the morning for the others to see, came back unnoticed in a secret route, shot the woman with a silencer, left her for dead in a sitting position, the gun thrown a distance away from the body because of his panic, but the woman did not die yet, then the perpetrator left through the same secret route then proceeded to his work place. after that, having calculated that the wife may be already dead, called the house to establish his whereabouts, rushed home to verify the status. but since the woman was still alive, rushed her to the hospital, instructing everyone to clean up.
beautiful story, right? but then of course it is fiction. LOL.
whatever it was that happened, whether suicide or murder, it will just be one of the unsolved cases in history a la oj simpson case. but then, in the end, whether it be solved or not, there is one witness to it and He will give judgement in the end. judgement for the person who took her own life or judgement for the person who took another’s. remember the 5th commandment: thou shalt not kill.
thanks, cat, for the time to read. hey, i’m not sure about which number that commandment falls under..hehe
iris,
thanks for the input. the beginning of an analysis starts with a clear mind. once you are prejudiced, all the comes after that would direct to the bias that has formed in your intellect.
i read a lot of detective stories too like kathy reichs, a real forensic scientist who can determine time and cause of death even what was left was the skeleton.
i read mary higgins clark which is light reading compared to james patterson which delves about psychology revealing the dark sides of people.
we cannot help but entertain the thoughts of other possibilities in the case of ted failon.
I also took a look at this angle but the sister said that she received a text from the wife and that was when Ted failon was on board.if she would have texted, it would be to ask for help.
I mentioned about the blood on the stairs that were observed to be not droplets. therefore the shooting was not done several hours earlier.
I lived in that area and it is a gated village where coming in of the vehicles are duly noted especially of the car used is not familiar.
haaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy! i don’t believe it was Ted Failon who killed his wife (sum1 else perhaps! and as to conspiracy, we never know)..he was at work at that time having an interview with uhmm, Pimentel?I think! ano cya? sum1 hu cud exist in a bi-location? and the argument that he must have done it earlier before work, it’s absurd since he would be the toughest guy if he cud still manage to do so..hup justice will prevail!
jessica,
i can not listen to radios and watch interviews even if I access them in my pc.
Yon ang sabi ni Pimentel? Pimentel is one of the politicians who ride on current issues.
Am i surprised?
The behavior of Ted and all the househelps,including Trina’s sister are good enough to create a doubt on the suicide issue. To me, it is a murder or at least homicide. Pity on Tina. She lost her life and yet the blame is passed on to her-SUICIDE! Why would ted not turn over his cellphone to the police to prove if he really made a call to his wife while at work? Why the clean up? Pamela’s reaction when she said she saw her sis in blood did not even mentioned she hugged her sister and motioned Ted to take her to hospital.In most cases. when a sibling sees his/her sibling in blood, the first reaction is to hug and check if still alive.Ted has alot to explain.
Lesson learnt on this case: WIVES, BE HONEST TO YOUR HUSBANDs. HUSBANDS, DO NOT TRUST 100% OF YOUR EARNINGS TO YOUR WIFE because if anything goes wrong with the handling of that moeny, it may cost LIFE.
case closed!