Armed Men: reconstruction of the events

In a live phonepatched  interview of Atty. Reynaldo Princesa, lawyer of ZTE witness Rodolfo “Jun” Lozada, by DZMM’s Ted Failon between 8:45 am to 9:10 am, the lawyer said the following:      

         Now that he was no longer bound by the privileged nature of attorney-client communication because his client had been released (by the way, under the Rules of Court, the privileged nature of  attorney-client communication  is carried by the lawyer to his/ her grave; but anyway, we don’t mind that he gave the public the  full story), he will narrate everything that transpired from the time he was told that his client was taken by armed men at the tube of the exit of the airplane and up to the time  his client surfaced; and why they filed a petitions for the privilege of the writs of habeas corpus and amparo.      

       He said:     

         1.Tuesday, Feb. 5, afternoon, the witness was taken by armed men at the tube of the airplane.    

      2.Still  Tuesday, afternoon  to about late evening or 10 pm, the witness was driven around by the armed men, out of town.   

       3.The armed men got a call.  The armed men asked the witness where he wanted to be brought, and he said to the La Salle brothers.          

        4.Between 10pm and 12 midnight of Tuesday  Feb. 5, he and the armed men arrive at the La Salle Greenhills compound. His family was there. The armed men did not leave.      

        5.Atty. Princesa  told the family that even if the client was already at the La Salle compound, the presence of the armed men still constituted restraint, so they should go ahead with the filing of their petition for the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus but he  would add a plea for the writ of amparo because they needed a protection order against the armed men.     

        6.Wednesday morning, the witness was again brought out or taken away from the La Salle compound by the armed men. He was in the custody of the armed men the whole of Wednesday.     

         7.He was brought to the La Salle compound again at 8:00 pm of Wednesday, Feb. 6. It was at this point that he was asked to sign the “affidavits”, un-notarized, the letters “requesting” for security, etc.       

         After the signing, the armed men were still there.      

       It wasn’t clear at what point  the armed men pulled out, but at some point either in the evening, midnight or before dawn, the armed men pulled out.    

          8. Thursday before dawn, Feb. 7 at 2:00 am, the witness decided to go public with the press conference.   

             ( i have to pull out now, sorry for the rush, i haven’t been posting photos and paintings for hurrying out i’ll be back in three hours.  But i’m not armed.)           


Discover more from marichulambino.com

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

One thought on “Armed Men: reconstruction of the events

  1. Atty. Marichu,
    Jun Lozada says that he told Atty. Bautista that he had some reservations about the accuracy of the affadavit he prepared for him to sign. But the lawyer said for him to sign it anyway so that the Palace would be happy (or words to that effect). Can the courts censure him for this. Thank you

    Like

If the comment posted does not appear here, that's because COMMENTS WITH SEVERAL HYPERLINKS ARE DETAINED BY AKISMET AT THE SPAM FOLDER.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.