Former President Rodrigo Duterte —FILE PHOTO
Former President Rodrigo Duterte has finally replied to the grave threats charge filed against him by ACT Rep. France Castro before the Quezon City Prosecutor’s Office.
The former president skipped the preliminary investigation of the charges that Castro filed on Oct. 26, but submitted a counteraffidavit through his lawyers Kristia Lorraine Caringal and Penrose Ann Valles.
Caringal is a junior partner while Valles a junior associate of Medialdea, Bello and Suarez, the law firm cofounded by Duterte’s former Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea and former Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra, the incumbent solicitor general.
In his pleading, Duterte argued that Castro’s accusations did not include the requisite elements of the crime of grave threats and that Castro took out of context his remarks during the Oct. 11 episode of “Gikan Sa Masa, Para sa Masa,” aired by Sonshine Media Network International.
Duterte claimed that he was merely recounting a conversation he had with his daughter, Vice President Sara Duterte, regarding confidential funds of the Office of the Vice President and the Department of Education.
“It was a narration of our private dialogue and my recollection of the advice that I gave Inday Sara concerning said issue … The alleged threatening statements were not even addressed to complainant Castro or to any individual as I was simply reciting the story of my talk with Inday Sara,” the pleading read.
“It bears emphasizing that none of the requisite elements of the crime charged are present considering that I made no actual threat whatsoever to complainant Castro,” Duterte argued.
Duterte said that the accusations against him were “downright baseless, unfounded and grossly insufficient to satisfy the requirements of probable cause to indict me for the crime charged.”
‘I want to kill all communists’
“In determining whether words were uttered as a threat, the context in which they were spoken must be considered,” Duterte argued.
“Going by said premise and taking into account the context in which my statements were uttered, the same can hardly be considered as a declaration of my purpose or intention to harm complainant Castro,” his counteraffidavit read.
Duterte argued that the elements of “actus reus” and “mens rea,” both of which must be present for the crime of grave threats, were lacking.
“Actus reus” refers to the infliction of any wrong to a person, his honor, property or family, while “mens rea” pertains to when the accused intended to intimidate or to be taken seriously by the other person.
“The alleged threatening statements were not even addressed to complainant Castro or to any individual as I was simply reciting the story of my talk with Inday Sara to the program viewers,” he said.
READ: Ex-president Duterte refutes lawmaker’s allegation in grave threat suit