Why is Senator Jinggoy Estrada’s bail hearing taking longer?
Senator Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada POOL PHOTO (file)
MANILA, Philippines — The bail hearing of Senator Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada again hit a snag on its third day as the defense of the pork barrel scam suspects slammed government prosecutors for their treatment of the documents of evidence.
The prosecution led by Manuel Soriano fielded to the witness stand Vic Escalante, a graft investigating officer of the Ombudsman, who verified the documents of evidence presented against Estrada.
These include endorsement letters from Estrada for the bogus organization of alleged mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles, as well as memoranda of agreement and project lists.
But the defense objected to the prosecution’s move in presenting the attendance sheet of supposed beneficiaries of one of Estrada’s pork barrel fund-project and calling it a “mastersheet” of recipients.
The defense led by Estrada’s counsel Sabino Acut Jr. said the prosecution is making conclusions about the evidence.
Article continues after this advertisementAcut said the prosecution should just read the title of the document instead of describing it.
Article continues after this advertisementTuesday marked the third day the defense and prosecution argued over the presentation of evidence without getting into the meat of proving whether or not evidence of guilt against Estrada is strong to allow him bail from plunder.
The bail hearing seemed to be taking too long compared to that of Senator Ramon Revilla Jr., whose hearing was already fielded with three witnesses. The prosecution’s next witness will be principal whistleblower Benhur Luy on Thursday.
Estrada’s lawyer Alexis Abastillas Suarez acknowledged that the bail hearing seemed to be taking too long compared to Revilla’s. But she added that the speed depends on the court’s discretion.
Suarez also said they opposed the prosecution’s move because “they are already giving conclusions to the content of documents.”
She added that they are also questioning Escalante as witness because he only testified as receiving the documents over the Ombudsman’s investigation and that his allegations are “hearsay.”
Instead of fielding Escalante, the prosecution should instead field principal whistleblowers, among them provisional state witness Ruby Tuason who has testified that she personally delivered kickbacks to Estrada, Suarez said.
RELATED STORIES
Jinggoy Estrada arrives at Sandigan for bail hearing
Prosecution to Sandigan: Don’t grant bail to Jinggoy Estrada
