Rose Barrameda kin score in CA ruling | Inquirer News

Rose Barrameda kin score in CA ruling

/ 12:20 AM March 06, 2013

RUBY Rose Barrameda

For the relatives of Ruby Rose Barrameda, the wheels of justice have started to turn again after more than a year.

In a decision handed down last month, the Court of Appeals lifted its February 2012 order which directed Judge Zaldy Docena of the Malabon Regional Trial Court Branch 170 to suspend hearings indefinitely pending a ruling on a petition filed by one of the accused for Docena to inhibit himself from the case.

ADVERTISEMENT

The newly-created Special Former 10th Division of Five also allowed another accused, Manuel Montero, to turn state witness, reversing a previous ruling handed down by the appellate court’s 10th Division.

FEATURED STORIES

The special division, however, denied a plea from prosecutors that Docena be retained as it ordered the case immediately reraffled off to another judge.

The Feb. 18 decision—a copy of which was received by the Department of Justice on Feb. 27—was penned by Associate Justice Jose C. Reyes Jr. and concurred in by Associate Justices Agnes Reyes-Carpio, Priscilla Baltazar-Padilla and new members of the special division Associate Justices Celia Librea-Ligeogo and Melchor Quirino Sadang.

It was based on a motion for reconsideration filed by prosecutors following the decision handed down by the 10th Division on May 22, 2012.

In particular, the 10th Division approved a petition filed by accused Manuel Jimenez Jr., Barrameda’s father-in-law, for Docena’s inhibition from the case due to his alleged partiality toward the victim’s family.

It also ruled that Montero could not turn state witness as he complied with only four of the five requirements specified in Section 17 of Rule 119.

Crucial testimony

ADVERTISEMENT

According to the special division, the fact that prosecutors had filed a motion for Montero’s discharge from the list of accused meant that they would not be able to secure a conviction without his testimony.

“It is in this sense that the proposed testimony is absolutely necessary,” it said as it added that Montero’s testimony could be “substantially corroborated in its material points.”

The location of the steel drum in which Barrameda’s body was found stuffed and encased in cement, for example, was correctly pinpointed by Montero, it noted.

Up to court to decide

As for the 10th Division’s argument that certain aspects of Montero’s testimony were inconsistent with available evidence, the special division said that these matters would be determined and scrutinized during the trial proper.

At the same time, it took issue with a portion of the 10th Division’s decision which said that Montero appeared to be the most guilty in the commission of the crime, saying the “principals by inducement,” and not those “by direct participation” like him, were the most liable.

“While Montero’s participation in the crime is clearly reprehensible, his culpability cannot be said [to be] of heavier weight than those who ordered … the commission of the dastardly act,” it said.

Court defends judge

Meanwhile, the special division did not seem to agree with the 10th Division’s observation that Judge Docena committed “grave abuse of discretion” when he allowed Montero to turn state witness, a decision the 10th Division reversed.

According to the special division, Docena’s actions were “consistent with judicial jurisprudence” as he relied “in large part” on the recommendations of the prosecution.

The prosecution, it went on to say, holds “much (of the) discretion” in determining who among the accused could be used as state witness.

However, the special division said that to “obviate any claim of bias or prejudice,” the case should be handled by a new judge.

On June 10, 2009, the police recovered in the waters off Navotas City a steel drum which was found to contain the body of Barrameda who went missing in March 2007 in the middle of a court battle with her husband, Manuel Jimenez III, for custody of their children.

The police later filed charges against her husband, her father-in-law, her father-in-law’s brother, Lope Jimenez, based on Montero’s testimony, as well as three other henchmen: Eric Fernandez, Robert Ponce and Lennard “Spyke” Descalso.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

Of those charged, only Jimenez Jr., Montero and Descalso have been arraigned so far. Lope Jimenez and Fernandez remain at large while Ponce was arrested only recently.

TAGS: Court of Appeals, Murder, Robert Ponce

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.