‘PNP must be sniffing something stronger than shabu,’ says Kerwin in counter-affidavit

Self-confessed drug distributor Rolan “Kerwin” Espinosa said on Tuesday  that the Philippine National Police (PNP) “must be sniffing something stronger than shabu” when they filed a case against him solely on the basis of his Senate testimony and a multiple affidavit of a lone witness.

“The CIDG (Criminal Investigation and Detection Group) attached to their Manifestation a number of pages comprising the transcripts of the hearings of the Philippine Senate in the latter’s investigation into the suspicious death of [his father] Mayor Rolando Espinosa,” he said in a counter-affidavit submitted before the Department of Justice (DOJ).

During the said Senate hearing, the young Espinosa admitted to being a drug distributor in the Visayas. A complaint has been filed with the DOJ but was dismissed for lack of evidence.

A new panel was created by then Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II to conduct a reinvestigation.

The PNP has submitted additional evidence, including the record of the Senate and House of Representatives’ hearing.

READ: OSG submits more evidence in bid to nail Peter Lim, Kerwin

“My statements are a matter of record. However, the complainant must be sniffing something stronger than shabu to think that such ‘admissions’ are sufficient for this Honorable Panel to hold that probable cause exists to indict me for violation of Republic Act 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002),” Espinosa said.

Under the complaint, Espinosa, together with Cebu-based businessman Peter Lim, alleged drug supplier Lovely Impal, alleged drug dealer Marcelo Adorco, Max Miro, Ruel Malindangan, Noel “Jun” Pepito, and 11 others were accused of violating Section 26 (b) in relation to Section 5 (Sale, Trading, Administration, Dispensation, Delivery, Distribution and Transportation of Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals) of Republic Act 9165, also known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.

Espinosa questioned how the government can prove how much drugs he had actually sold in the market when it doesn’t even have any evidence that he has in his possession illegal drugs.

He also asked what penalty will be imposed on him since under RA 9165, penalties are based on the quantity of drugs found in an individual’s possession.

Aside from his testimony before both Houses of Congress, the police, through the Office of the Solicitor General, also presented 37 checks issued to various women allegedly protecting him and his ‘drug business.’

“In the ordinary course of human behavior, nobody but nobody would issue checks for an illegal transaction such as ‘protection in the illegal drug business’; everything would be in cash to avoid a paper trail,” Espinosa argued.

During the preliminary investigation on Tuesday, only Espinosa submitted his counter -affidavit.

The DOJ panel gave other respondents up to May 30 to file their counter-affidavits and submit their own evidence. /ee