The Antipolo City Prosecutor’s Office has reversed its earlier recommendation to dismiss the murder charge filed against a former barangay (village) treasurer in connection with the killing of an alleged hitman who backed out of a plot to assassinate Antipolo Mayor Jun Ynares and his father, former Rizal Gov. Ito Ynares.
This was after the suspect, former Barangay San Luis treasurer Alfred Garcia, was found to be the last person contacted by the victim, Rolando Laroco, before the latter was shot dead on Aug. 26.
In a resolution issued on Nov. 21, Assistant City Prosecutor Edgar Namia partially reversed the resolution he issued on Oct. 8 in which he ordered the dismissal of the murder charges filed by the victim’s wife, Dorina Laroco, against former Antipolo Mayor Nilo Leyble, incumbent Antipolo Vice Mayor Puto Leyva, former Barangay San Luis chair Andrei Zapanta and Garcia. This was after he described the evidence presented in the charge sheet as “hearsay, speculation and conjecture.”
Dorina had earlier claimed that her husband was ordered killed by Leyble and the other accused after he decided to back out of the assassination plot against the Ynareses.
Leyble, who ran for reelection as Antipolo mayor in May, lost against the younger Ynares. He denied the charge against him, which he described as a form of political harassment.
The Nov. 21 resolution which was approved by Mario Rosario Luna, officer in charge of the Antipolo City Prosecutor’s Office, was issued in response to Dorina’s filing of a motion for reconsideration.
Namia said he ordered the conduct of a preliminary investigation against Garcia based on “newly discovered evidence.”
He added that the results of a digital forensic examination of the victim’s cell phone showed that Garcia was the last person to receive a text message from the victim before the latter was shot dead.
According to Namia, the results “point to (Garcia) solely.”
“Thus, in so far as the other respondents are concerned, namely Tin tin Garcia, [Leyble, Leyva and Zapanta], the resolution dated Oct. 8, 2013 stays,” he said.
Namia, meanwhile, took offense at Dorina’s allegation that the prosecutor’s office acted “in haste” when it ordered the dismissal of the murder charge against the respondents in its earlier resolution.
He said that he “considered all the pieces of evidence submitted, together with the complaint.”
“If they wanted this office to consider the results of the digital forensic examination, then they should have waited for it before filing the complaint,” Namia said, adding that while the complaint against the accused was filed on Sept. 26, the results of the digital forensic examination came out on Oct. 10.
“This office is never at liberty to wait for any piece of evidence that the parties may acquire after filing the case. In fact, it is the duty of the parties and counsels to marshal every piece of evidence prior to their filing of the case,” he added.
As for Dorina’s observation that a formal preliminary investigation should have been conducted by the Prosecutor’s Office, Namia said they were “not a fact-finding [body].”
“We were never clothed with the power to collect pieces of evidence for or in behalf of any party,” he said as he ordered Dorina to appear before him on Dec. 11 and 18.
Garcia, on the other hand, was directed to submit his defense to the prosecutor’s office also on Dec. 11 and 18.
Dorina earlier claimed that she learned about the alleged plot against the Ynareses through her husband who, before his death, kept her updated on “the project” and through his conversations over the phone with Garcia.