Napoles bail hearing: Prosecution asks that accused appear: Guide for Reporters

Based on live tweets from Rappler reporter Bea Cupin, before prosecution witness NBI agent Benuo was excused (upon termination of his cross), the prosecution asked that the accused Janet Lim-Napoles be brought to court so that the witness could identify her as the “tall lady” who heaped invectives on them when they were on the premises.

     Guide for reporters: Under the rights of the accused in the revised rules of criminal procedure, the accused may waive his/ her presence at his/her own trial, except when he/she is ordered by the court to be present for purposes of identification.

     So… at the end of this hearing, if the prosecution lawyer is not forgetful, it will move for the issuance of a court order for the accused to be produced in court for purposes of identification. When such court order is issued, it will then have to recall prosecution witness Benuo to identify said accused as part of his testimony.

       Lawyers have many experiences about witnesses identifying and tagging persons.

     What is your experience?

      in a special civil action (as respondent’s counsel in an injunction case) ,   a person who was part of the testimony of our  witness was present in court. But obviously he was not an accused, and he was not a party to the case… but… he instigated the action. Anyway.  so my colleagues and i  asked the witness whether or not the person was in court; yes… then asked him to point at him. Then we asked the person to stand up and to state his name. Then…

      We marked him as an exhibit. For the record. Exhibit G.

      Anyway.

     That would not be necessary here. The witness would  just point at the accused and she will be asked to state her name.

      When the prosecution at the end of this hearing moves for such court order (to compel attendance of the accused), counsel for the accused can either:

    a) interpose no objection;           b) object, then state the ground;

    c) stipulate that she was the person referred to by the witness in his testimony.

     If counsel for the accused stipulates, then the accused would not have to be produced in court. If she objects, she could cite grounds and there would be argumentation etc. etc.