Defense team spokesperson holds press briefing following Day 3 of impeachment trial — July 8

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Hello, good afternoon. I'll take questions as usual, but we're still a bit late today. [00:00:17] Speaker 2: How's the 3rd day? [00:00:20] Speaker 1: Okay, we're very happy with our performance today. Also, I'd like to, of course, thank my co-counsel, Attorney CJ Narvaza, who we feel did a really good job sa kanyang cross-examination. We had targets for today, and we can confidently say that we were able to achieve those targets. Maraming kaming mga gustong lumabas, di ba? For example, again, I cannot discuss the merits, but at least yung nakita nyo, para factual lang tayo, maraming kaming gustong palabasin, like for example, yung extent ng investigation na ginawa, anong mga ibang parts ng video that would provide context, for example, and then also yung nature ng affidavit of investigation, kung isa lang ba talaga yun, o may isa pang nauna, etc. So, pagdating naman doon sa kung ano ba talaga yung punto na gusto naming tumbukin doon, hindi ko na lang i-discuss, because that will really go into the merits. So, sa factual lang tayo. And those, we had our targets basically for cross-examination, and we're very happy that Attorney CJ was able to execute that to the T. [00:01:34] Speaker 3: Well, it gave at least a context on our case theory on the matter, di ba? [00:02:00] Speaker 1: Meaning kung ano ba yung sa pananaw namin talaga ang nangyari dito, at bakit namin sinasabing walang basihan yung nagiging allegation nila, especially doon sa pagiging isang impeachable offense nito. But as the presiding officer mentioned, dito naman sa litigation, dito sa mga nangyayaring paglilitis, ang importante is maliban sa mga statements, ang importante talaga yung mapakita natin through yung mga ebidensya na ilalabas pa natin sa mga tarating na araw. Again, ang gusto kong mapaliwanag sa ating mga kababayan, may ano kasi yan, no? Kung baga, we take our turns, no? So, prosecution muna talagang naglalatag ng kanilang ebidensya, at pagkatapos naman nun, once the prosecution rests and makes their formal offer on the documentary evidence that they will be offering, panahon naman yun ng depensa para naman maglabas at maglatag ng aming mga testigo at mga ebidensya. [00:03:00] Speaker 4: At sa cross-examination, ano yung malaki at mabigat na maaaring sa ating napakulayan po ng depensa? [00:03:06] Speaker 1: Mahirap po eh, kasi Sir Henry, pasensya na po talaga kayo because we will be getting into the merits eh. So, when we discuss that, we sway public opinion one way or the other. Pero, masabi ko lang po, gusto lang namin ipakita, no? Kung ano ba talaga yung naging extent ng investigasyon na isinagawa and through the words of the witness, makikita naman po natin kung ano yung nangyari talaga. [00:03:29] Speaker 5: So, para lang maitindihan ang taupaya, no? So, why do we please don't ask the credibility and authenticity ng video since before sinabi ni DT Sarah na ginawa niya talaga? [00:03:39] Speaker 1: Well, with the existence of the statement, siguro alam naman natin lahat, hindi na tayo makikipaglokohan that the statement ever existed. But as to the video, for example, it's important kasi ang ebidensya, hindi naman yan pwedeng maglakad mag-isa papunta sa korte, hindi ba? That's why, and not just with impeachment, that's with all regular court proceedings. Hindi naglalakad ang ebidensya mag-isa papunta sa korte. So, you need someone to identify it, to authenticate it. Pagdating sa video, syempre, gusto natin malaman saan nila nakuha yung video, diba? Dahil, lalo na sa panahon na ganito, wala tayong aligasyon na may binago, wala tayong sinasabing ganun. Pero syempre, kailangan natin makasigurado na authenticated yung video, na ano ba yung source ng video nila, diba? Kasi karamihan sa atin, I think, I don't know if any one of you here were there, but members of the press were also in that video. And I think it was a Zoom video, no? So, importante na makompare yung Zoom video dun sa pinapakitang video sa atin para masabi natin na talagang faithful yung video sa talagang naganap or talagang, yun talaga yung video na lumabas or yun yung naging Zoom press conference na lumabas. So, although, you know, I'm sure maraming natagalan sa proceedings kahapon, that's normal and I'm sure pagdating sa defense, that's why I always say, in fairness to the prosecution, pagdating sa defense, baka kailangan din namin gawin yan, mag-authenticate ng, hindi lang ng video, pero ng mga dokumento, which will take time because we will need the person, so a personal knowledge in terms of extraction of documents, videos, transcripts, etc., to identify them in open court, no? [00:05:27] Speaker 2: Sir, rin ka sabi, I'll contact your targets, yung mga pag-destroy po sa credibility ni Mr. Palino. Kasi parang doon sa simula pa lang po, kung nasa ka na yung mat-release niya, never. [00:05:39] Speaker 1: Well, kanina kasi, ang sinasabi naman ay siya, hindi expert but competent witness. So, we were just really, in every cross-examination, we always test the credibility of the witness to be able to determine if the witness is in fact capable of making the testimonies that he or she is making. So, that's just part of it. Pero, I don't want to form conclusions because that's for the impeachment court to do. Ano po yun? Hindi ko po kasi... Yung specific... Naalala niyo ba kung ano yung... I won't comment na muna. I won't comment na muna on that one. O, dahil hindi ko maano kung ano yung specific. Asensya na po. [00:06:28] Speaker 6: Sir, bako kung kung paano yung... [00:06:30] Speaker ?: Di pa pa kasi namin... [00:06:32] Speaker 3: Okay, under about the rules sa affidavits na bumula sa part of the project, at kung paano na naman na isang sure, [00:06:40] Speaker ?: magigaba sa... [00:06:42] Speaker 1: Again, factual lang, no? We just wanted to show that there are two affidavits of investigation. Hindi lang isa. Yun na lang po. Ngayon, as to what that translates to, again, I really cannot argue our case in the media. We will leave it up to the impeachment court. Factual lang. Ang affidavit of investigation kasi yun basically yung complaint. Na hinihain ng NBI. Well, kanina ang inisip namin, di naman na kailanganin muna para sa witness na ito, yung two-hour video. That's not to say that we will not be asking for the playback of the two-hour video for some other witness. I'm not saying we will. I'm not saying we won't. Parate kong sinasabi, tinitingnan namin base sa takbo ng proceedings, kung kailangan ba o hindi. And as I've told you, I think both the prosecution and the defense ayaw rin namin patagalin at, you know, we play a two-hour video that will take two-hour, 26 minutes of our time. And the, of course, judicial time also, not the time of the court. So, hanggat naman hindi kinakailangan, sabi nga namin, hanggat pwedeng papabilisin namin. Pero kung sa tingin namin kinakailangan, we're still not discounting the fact that we might ask for that whole two-hour video to be, two-hour, 26-minute video. [00:08:10] Speaker 3: The way I'll respond to that is, [00:08:40] Speaker 1: once the witness is called, the offer is made. If we feel the need to object, of course, we will object to the purpose for the presentation of the witness. And kung hindi naman, we will be ready to cross-examine that witness. [00:08:54] Speaker 6: Tuesday po yata. Si Lotok sa Monday and then si Captain Delio, gaano kayo pa handa doon sa... Opo, [00:09:06] Speaker 1: handa naman po kami dahil expected na po yan. Lumabas na kasi sa pre-trial brief ng prosecution itong mga witnesses na ito. So, tayo naman ay handa na. As far as, of course, Agent Lotok and si Captain Belio. Kung hindi ako nagkakamali, nandun na rin sila sa House Committee on Justice hearing. So, we have prepared for them. [00:09:35] Speaker 6: Well, [00:09:40] Speaker 1: that is for the prosecution eh. Kasi sila ang nagtawag kay Atty. Atty. Zulaika. So, we will just be there to see if we need to ask further questions on Atty. Zulaika once the prosecution is done with their direct... We'll see if there's a need for us to cross-examine. [00:09:57] Speaker 6: Yes, [00:10:02] Speaker 1: yesterday nung lumabas yung motion, nakatanggap kami ng kopya ng motion for issuance of subpoena which included the name of Atty. Zulaika Lopez or Yusek Lopez. We have informed the Vice President of the same. And, ano naman siya? As I told you earlier, yung reaction naman niya, wala naman siyang ganong-ganong reaction doon because I think everyone expected it naman including the Vice President. I think na-mention na po kanina. Again, I'm really sorry. I cannot talk about the merits so baka pwedeng balikan na lang natin na-mention naman kanina yan. But, of course, one is context, hindi ba? But, I guess, to sum it up, it was the transcription. The accuracy in transcription. That's why ganon yung tanong ni Atty. Zulaika Lopez. But, again, gusto ko lang kasi I'm worried that I'm courting contempt whenever I answer your questions on substantive matters or at least matters on the merits. So, I just wanted to just state for the record that I'm just trying to be factual and recount what happened inside without saying that we were able to prove this or that. [00:11:16] Speaker 7: Well, of course, may tahapon inibidor si Atty.J. Narvaza. Ngayon, parang, ang dating na yun ay parang pinupuri siya ngayon for his cause. After the cause examination, ano ang pakiragot ni Atty.J. Narvaza? Were you able to talk to him after the cause? [00:11:34] Speaker 1: Well, si Atty.J. Narvaza is a very level-headed person. So, kung ano man ang mga batikos sa kanya kahapon, pagpuri ngayon, his disposition remains the same. I think sanay naman kaming mga abugado na you can never please everyone at any given time. Ako, I've been spokesperson for a few years and I have my group of bashers and group of friends. So, we always support each other naman pagdating sa mga ganyan. But, our disposition should be level-headed. Sabi nga natin, di ba, hindi tayo nagbibilang kung sinong panalo, sinong talo sa araw-araw because it will happen. There will be times that members of the public won't like what we do. There are times that members of the public would like it. So, sa atin, we just focus on our job and do the best we can to defend the Vice President. Ah, definitely. Para sa akin, 10 out of 10 din. Score internally, ah, meaning we're very happy that we hit our targets. But as to yung scoring on na nalo ba kami today or yesterday or ano, I really don't want to do that. As you can see, ang tanong sa amin kanina is bakit kami object ng object kahapon? And then ngayon, nakita nyo rin, puro objection rin ng prosecution. And I'm saying, there's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing wrong with the prosecution objecting. There's nothing wrong with us objecting. It's just lawyers doing their jobs. [00:13:01] Speaker 4: Sir, pa-pa-explan my idea 10 out of 10? [00:13:05] Speaker 1: Ah, because we were, we had and we were able to meet our targets. So, ah, I think, you know, we accomplished a lot. Thank you very much, thank you very much. We'll see you next week. Next week, Monday. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.