On Wisdom of the Court

The wisdom of the Court

After fifteen long-years, the Supreme Court acquitted Hubert Webb and six other convicts jailed for the grisly 1991 Vizconde massacre. The Court thrashed the testimony of prosecution star witness Jessica Alfaro as “inconsistent and unbelievable.”

In a voting of 7-4-4, the Court acquitted Webb, Antonio Lejano, Michael Gatchalian, Hospicio Fernandez, Miguel Rodriguez, Peter Estrada and Gerardo Biong “for failure of the prosecution to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.”

The Supreme Court reversed the decision dated Dec. 15, 2005, and the resolution dated Jan. 26, 2007, of the Court of Appeals and ordered the immediate release from detention of Webb et al. unless they are confined for another lawful cause.

Article VIII, Section 15 (1) of the Constitution directs: All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this Constitution must be decided or resolved within twenty-four months from the date of submission for the Supreme Court, and, unless reduced by the Supreme Court, twelve months for all lower collegiate courts, and three months for all other lower courts.

Then why did it take that long for the SC Justices to read in detail the inconsistencies in Alfaro's testimony as their claim pointed out? Convicts who had been released from the National Bilibid Prison cannot believe the sudden acquittal of Webb et. al, based on the not guilty findings of the SC.

Convicts I interview said they never heard of inmates imprisoned for 15 years and above who were released from prison due to reversal of sentence from guilty to not guilty. As disclosed, the probable reason for an inmate's release ahead of his term is by commutation of sentence.

Others were released from prison not on the ground of a not guilty findings of the SC which review their cases but because of their good behavior. In which case, prison officials recommend them for parole or pardon.

Had there been report of any late-arrest of suspects that can be attributed to the massacre, it will surely cushion the negative impact of this SC reversal of verdict from guilty to “not guilty.” For that, they only added this celebrated case to the list of unsolved crimes in Philippine history.

Worse is the entailed statement of the Court in its decision to acquit the seven accused. It says; “In our criminal justice system, what is important is, not whether the court entertains about the innocence of the accused since an open mind is willing to explore all possibilities, but whether it entertains a reasonable lingering doubt as to his guilt.”

Jurisprudence tells us that a question of law exists when the doubt or controversy concerns the correct application of law to a certain set of facts; or when the issue does not call for an examination of the probative value of the evidence presented, the truth or falsehood of the facts being admitted.

There is also a question of fact when a doubt or difference arises as to the truth or falsehood of facts or when the query invites calibration of the whole evidence considering mainly the credibility of the witnesses, the existence and relevancy of specific surrounding circumstances, as well as their relation to each other and to the whole, and the probability of the situation.

The credibility of the witness and her testimony have been dealt with accordingly and calibrated by the lower court during the niceties of the trial, of which the CA eventually upheld. Sad to say but these were reversed by the SC on mere technicality.

Due to the still existing procedural questions relative to this case, it creates an impression without affirming the perception that this long-delayed decision of the SC of acquitting Hubert Webb et. al, is in exchange for - you know what!

So, who murdered Estrellita Vizconde and her daughters, Jennifer, 7 and Carmela, 18, who was raped before being stabbed to death? If the murderers are still at-large they could be smiling to the ears by now. For Lauro Vizconde, this wisdom of SC Justices is a tragedy as it endangers him of becoming their last casualty!