“The piece correctly identifies the witness by her proper name, and allows her to give her first hand account of the accident. The effects of the accident were obvious, but the particulars about the reasons as to why the bus fell of the Skyway in the first place have been under constant debate. The Skyway operators claim that their structures meet international standards, although they make no comment on having strict implementation on speed limits. The source was the sole third-party witness to the incident, and she points towards the driver’s illegal speeding as the probable cause of the accident. The article and the witness were fair enough to admit that it was the early hours of the morning, and that it had been raining at the time of the incident. The witness also admits that because of the ‘speedy’ nature of the accident, she had doubts about what had happened and had to stop to confirm that the bus had actually fallen off the Skyway. The piece is able to give a first hand account of the incident without unjustly criminalising the bus driver, as there has not been enough gathered evidence to point to his negligence as the cause of the accident.”
********
Written by Chairmaine Ycasas Dec. 17, 2013, 7:15 am, “Re: Media Monitor for Dec 17, 2013 (4th media monitor)
“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
“The link above shows the report of a GMA news reporter –Julius Secovia aired yesterday at the program ‘State of the Nation with Jessiaca Soho’. The news is about the power rate hike of Meralco. The report played and revolved around the different stand and/or updates from the political parties, legislators and the government itself. All of these methods are done to achieve the common goal of knowing and answering the questions such as how is the power hike being done, why is there a power hike? When shall it take place and other similar concerns.
“I could say that this report is fair, factual and objective. First, Fair- although it can be observed that the news started with a negative statement from a Gabriela party list representative, followed by Rep. Fernando Hicap and Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, who were all asking in such a manner “ What is the Aquino administration doing ?” , the reporter didn’t fail to get the statement of Malacanang spokesperson, Sec. Edwin Lacierda. Second, factual- the credibility of this report is of no question. Just by simply looking at names of high ranking officials who gave their statement. Third, Objective- It can be observed that the report is somehow plotted in a very systematic manner. As mentioned above it started asking the party list , which could represent the citizen and their inquiries about the power hike. And then some legislators answered that the people must not stop to seek for answers, they can even file an online petition or write a letter to their congressman. One senator suggested to use the Malampaya Funds. (Notice that they didn’t really answer the question, since this is just their stand and they are not in authority to answer) And finally, the side of the palace stating that they will investigate if there were any internal arrangement between power plants that causes power hike (which is the answer to question).”
I’ve nothing to write about today — What is the difference between the PDAF being struck down as unconstitutional and the DAP being dealt a legal fatal blow?
PDAF is an act of Congress; DAP was
created by the hand of the President.
From where the President sits, a lethal attack on the DAP has more serious legal consequences on the presidency – maybe not political because his people keep reminding us he still has the numbers —
but who is to say what outcomes legal blows may bring.
Therefore, from this point of view, he had to, and has to put up a fight for DAP — from where he sits, he cannot have it undone, having it undone wholesale might weaken the case of Malacañang before the Supreme Court.
It’s almost like…i hate to say this… being indicted in a criminal case or being an accused in a criminal case — legally, your only options are to stay silent — or to fight back (actively present defenses). You cannot do any act that would be construed as admissions that you were wrong — you cannot confess. It’s almost like … i’m sorry i’m going to say this… it’s almost like —ikaw ang nasasakdal. Sorry i had to say that; but this allows an understanding of why he has to do what he is doing.
That’s the difference between the attack on the PDAF and the onslaught on the DAP. DAP is made up of his overt acts.
His “advisers” thought the best form was the unprecedented primetime all- TV -network -broadcast. And since his trust rating was slipping as well, instead of confining themselves to legal arguments, they thought they might as well throw in the “i-am-not-a-thief” theme.
There are however some questions about the logic displayed in the speech itself or the content, in the context of the “scrap-pork” calls.
The call, supported by overwhelming numbers according to the empirical data of the social scientists, is:
The better policy and tactic now is to concentrate on building up the case against her (for plunder or otherwise) – focus on gathering the primary documents:
•contracts,
•vouchers,
•checks,
•deposit slips,
•transaction slips,
•bank statements,
•photos,
•videos,
•and other documentary evidence cited by the witnesses and by the COA report;
and object evidence: equipment, infrastructure, vehicles, real and personal properties, until the evidence is more than enough for a primafacie case – instead of relying on wild talk of her possible offer of testimony.
You will need to secure documents and witnesses from the banks and the clearing houses. Fast. Now. Important.
Don’t get distracted.
— To be charged with a public official or public officials if for plunder (without prejudice to forfeiture proceedings). And, oh, important: don’t forget to add “John Does” when you craft the complaint; or as what other lawyers do in other criminal cases, you can put: “John Doe, Juan P. Doe, Bong Doe, Bongbong Doe, Jinggoy Doe, Greg Doe, and other John and Jeanne Does”… more important, make sure your Information (formal charge), and not just the complaint, contains John Does.
Make sure the Information complies with all the elements and all the terms of the criminal statute – plunder requires a series of predicate acts that are also criminal in nature, spell out what those overt acts are — open the statute books when you’re crafting the Info (do not copy and paste), make a back-and forth- and refer every line to it — even if you think it’s perfect, show it to other criminal trial experts and CPA-lawyers; the Information (formal charge) will make your case rise or fall in the preliminary motions and throughout the presentation of evidence…
