Jinggoy cites Enrile in appealing denied bail
Sen. Jinggoy Estrada is taking a last-ditch effort to overturn the denial of his bail from plunder over the pork barrel scam by citing the Supreme Court decision granting the bail of his coaccused colleague Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile.
On Friday, Estrada filed his motion for reconsideration on the Sandiganbayan Fifth Division’s denial of his bail petition.
Estrada said as in Enrile’s case, his not being a flight risk should have been a consideration for the court to grant his bail.
The Supreme Court granted Enrile’s bail from hospital detention due to his frail health and age, as well as his political stature.
The high court granted Enrile’s bail because his surrender to authorities as well as his social and political standing made flight risk unlikely.
Estrada surrendered to authorities when he was charged for plunder in June 2014.
READ: Enrile out on bail, says his faith in justness of Judiciary vindicated
“The issue of flight risk should be considered in determining whether or not the motion for bail should be granted,” Estrada, through his lawyers, said.
“Under the foregoing backdrop, the issue on flight risk should not be considered academic. In the case of (Enrile), the Supreme Court held that risk of flight of the accused must be taken into account in resolving an application for bail,” he added.
Estrada pleaded for the Sandiganbayan to use the method employed by the Supreme Court when it granted bail to Enrile.
Estrada also cited the inconsistencies in the testimony of the witnesses, particularly Benhur Luy, the finance officer of accused pork scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles, and self-confessed agent Ruby Tuason.
While pinning Estrada to the same, Luy has testified that he has not seen him receive kickbacks either from Napoles or his alleged agent Pauline Labayen, the senator said. Labayen fled her plunder charge.
Estrada also said the court could not rely on Luy’s daily disbursement records, which he said had been tampered with.
Estrada also questioned the testimony of Tuason, his father’s former social secretary, who alleged that she delivered to him bags of kickbacks from Napoles.
Estrada said the court could not rely heavily on Tuason’s testimony considering the latter’s motive to save her own skin from charges.
“It is difficult to perceive how this witness had no ill motive in testifying. In fine and essence, she had every reason to weave a complex web of inconsistent and uncorroborated statements to satisfy the missing details of the story. Her motivation for giving false testimony against Senator Estrada in order to exculpate herself is evident from her own words,” Estrada said.
Estrada also said the court erred in saying the CCTV footage in the Senate, which did not show Tuason carrying any bags of kickbacks to Estrada, gave more credence to her testimony.
“With due respect to the Honorable Court, its conclusion is incorrect. On the contrary, the CCTV footages would effectively rebut Ruby Tuason’s testimony that she was indeed at the Senate building on a particular place and time when the supposed delivery of commissions were made,” Estrada said.
Estrada also said he should not be found guilty just because a witness alleged that the money given to agents was intended for him.
“To conclude that Senator Estrada amassed ill-gotten wealth because Benhur Luy supposedly delivered money to Pauline Labayen, Ruby Tuason and/or other persons, is to find Senator Estrada guilty by mere association. However, ‘mere suspicion, speculation, relationship, association and companionship do not prove conspiracy,'” Estrada said.
As to the court’s reliance on the findings of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) which found that Estrada used alleged conduits to stash away millions of kickbacks, Estrada said Luy had not mentioned the conduit Juan Ng as a middleman.
READ: AMLC shows how Jinggoy Estrada got Napoles ‘kickbacks’
Estrada also said the court erred in agreeing with the AMLC that the dates Luy purportedly disbursed kickbacks to Estrada coincided or came close to the dates his conduits received millions of cash in their bank accounts.
Also, the Napoles NGO which purportedly transferred P10 million to Ng in March 2010 was not even endorsed by Estrada to implement his project, the senator said.
Estrada, however, did not contend with the court’s finding that his signatures were somehow similar to those of Ng.
In showing that Estrada’s signatures and penmanship were similar with Ng’s according to bank checks, the court said Estrada and Ng could be one and the same.
Jinggoy’s alleged use of conduits is reminiscent of the Jose Velarde account, which is supposedly owned by Jinggoy’s father former President Joseph Estrada to stow away “jueteng” kickbacks. The former president was convicted but later pardoned of plunder over the kickbacks during his short-lived term.
READ: Sandigan denies Jinggoy bail plea
The Sandiganbayan denied Jinggoy Estrada’s bail from plunder after over a year of hearings.
According to the court, the prosecution is able to prove strong evidence of guilt, but this does not mean that Estrada is guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Because of his role in endorsing the bogus foundations that implemented the ghost projects, the court called Estrada “the apex of the PDAF (Priority Development Assistance Fund) scam.”
Estrada is accused of receiving P183 million kickbacks from Napoles. He is detained at the Philippine National Police Custodial Center with coaccused Sen. Ramon Revilla Jr. RC
