VP Sara defense panel holds briefing after Day 39 of impeachment trial (October 13, 2026)

[0:00] Okay, sige. First and foremost, I won't limit to the extended ruling. Maybe para malinaw sa lahat. [0:09] First and foremost, we are not objecting to the motion, kasi it was treated as a motion, to withdraw Articles 1, 3, and 4 ng prosecution. [0:22] So, para nilang klaro tayo, we were not objecting to that, kasi it is really the position of the defense na prerogatiba yan ng bawat panig kung paano nila represent yung mga ebidensyon nila. [0:36] In this case, kahit po yung pag-withdraw ng Articles para sa atin, prerogatiba naman subject, of course, to the approval of the impeachment court. [0:46] Dahil nga, once a case is filed, or in this case, once the Articles of Impeachment were filed before the impeachment court, [0:55] syempre, nasa impeachment court na yun, kung papayagan niyang ma-withdraw yung Articles or hindi. [1:02] And that's why the impeachment court treated it as a motion to withdraw these three Articles. [1:08] So, on that aspect, hindi po tayo nag-object. [1:12] Ang naging issue lang po talaga natin ay dalawa. [1:19] Number one, ang tanong is, pwede pa rin ba kami mag-present doon sa mga Articles na winit-throw na nila? [1:29] Walang problema yung pribery eh, kasi hindi nila na-present yun. [1:33] Ang problema natin, yung grave threat, syaka yung confidential funds, [1:37] kasi napresenta na po yung mga testimonya ng kanilang mga testigo doon. [1:45] And we are not given now the opportunity to present rebuttal evidence through the testimonies of our witnesses. [1:52] So, yun yung isang pinagagalingan namin doon na paano yun? [1:58] Pwede pa ba kaming mag-present doon or hindi na? [2:00] Yun yung isang katanungan. [2:02] And the second one was doon sa Extended Ruling on Rule 18. [2:08] Meaning, hindi na makukover ng sub-judice rule yung Articles na winit-throw. [2:14] So, to us, it's also somewhat problematic. [2:19] Kasi, unang-una sa lahat, iba naman yung narinig mo yung salita ng testigo doon sa korte. [2:28] Iba rin naman yung kami-kami lang ang nagsasabi sa media. [2:31] Pangalawa, at nabanggit ko rin naman ito, so this is just factual. [2:36] Nabanggit ko, sinabi ko noong time ko na, katulad ng sinabi ni Senator Cayetano, [2:42] paano na yung mga gusto namin ipatawag na testigo na hindi naman namin masasabi na sa isang press con, di ba? [2:50] So, may mga ganung factors. [2:52] And lastly, nabanggit ko rin kasi kanina na merong kasing gag order yung RTCQC doon sa grave threat case. [3:00] So, pagdating doon, hindi kami makakapagsalita. [3:04] However, I think it must be also stated, since the public is watching and listening to us, [3:10] na nagpapasalamat din naman kami sa presiding officer dahil alam din naman natin yung pinanggagalingan niya [3:16] na yung Rule 18 ay really to give the respondent an avenue para sagutin yung mga paratang [3:24] na hindi na masagot dito dahil nga na-withdraw yung article. [3:27] So, alam naman natin that in good faith yun. [3:30] And in fact, it was being made favorable pa nga to the defense, di ba? [3:37] And that's why they didn't expect us to object with that. [3:41] Pero yun nga, meron lang talagang mga issues na kailangan harapin at kailangan masabi sa Korte [3:50] kung bakit we don't necessarily agree with the total lifting of Rule 18 [3:56] as far as the withdrawn articles are concerned. [3:58] Sir, we don't prejudice to the defense's next move after this extended ruling. [4:04] What are the available recourse aside from the motion for reconsideration that you will be, you know, [4:10] talking about with your client? [4:13] Is a petition for certiorari a viable option? [4:16] It is okay. [4:17] Apo. [4:18] Unang-una sa lahat, it's not really a motion for reconsideration. [4:22] I think we were just given the opportunity to confer with our client [4:26] and then, kumbaga, ipaalam lamang sa court kung ano yung komento ng aming client. [4:33] Kasi may pending, I think, motion for reconsideration si Senator Kiko Pangilinan. [4:38] Senator Judge, sorry, Kiko Pangilinan. [4:40] And, ano kasi, bawal kasi mag-MR ang mga bawat panig, no? [4:46] And that's what the prosecution was pointing out kanina. [4:49] Natama naman, bawal talagang mag-MR yung bawat panig. [4:51] It's really the senator judges lang that can actually ask for reconsideration of the ruling of the presiding officer. [4:58] So, kami, ang gagawin lang namin ngayon is once makausap namin ng aming cliente, [5:02] of course, the respondent vice president, [5:04] Ipapaalam lang namin sa korte kung ano ang kanyang posisyon dito sa Rule 18 issue na ito. [5:11] As for certiorari, wala kaming kinoconsider na certiorari at this point. [5:19] Hindi namin na pag-uusapan yan. [5:21] Ang sa amin kasi is really, [5:23] unang-una, kung maalala nyo, [5:25] at-cautelam naman talaga ang participation natin dito. [5:28] Simula pa nung umpisa sa answer pa lang natin. [5:31] We reiterated our at-cautelam participation doon sa voting threshold nung napag-uusapan yung voting threshold issue. [5:40] So, sa ngayon, ang gusto lang naman talaga natin is since may mga nailabas na testimonya laban sa ating kliyente, [5:49] gusto naman natin na makasagot din naman tayo sa... [5:52] Parang natin kasi namin sinasabi, tamang forum eh, di ba? [5:55] Tapos, isingilin nyo kami, kailan yung tamang forum? [5:58] Sabi namin, baka dito na sa impeachment. [5:59] Tapos, ngayon, hindi na naman namin masasagot. [6:02] So, gagawin naman namin sa media. [6:04] So, those are just things that we are grappling with at the moment. [6:08] And we did not expect kasi yung ganung dropping off all three articles. [6:19] Bakit namin dapat ina-expect? [6:21] Hindi ko alam kung... [6:22] So, I mean, what we expect is that if they file articles of impeachment and they think those articles are strong, [6:30] that they will try to prove all articles, di ba? [6:32] Wala naman siguro nagpa-file ng kaso sa court at sinay-expect na i-withdraw. [6:36] So, nangyari naman na daw kulay sa corona trial? [6:41] Nangyari sa corona trial. [6:42] So, baka naman ang ibig sabihin ng prosecution, with all due fairness to them, is hindi naman unusual to. [6:47] Baka naman ganun ang ibig sabihin nila. [6:49] I hope they're not misquoted kasi I really don't know how we can expect this. [6:53] But, wala namang problema dun sa pag-withdraw ng articles. [6:58] Nangyayari talaga yun. [6:59] Nangyayari nga yun sa corona. [7:00] In fact, in corona, they withdrew five articles out of the eight. [7:03] But, ang issue, anong pagkakaiba ng corona dito? [7:09] Sa corona, nung win-withdraw ng prosecution yung articles, [7:12] hindi po sila nag-presenta ng ebidensya dun sa articles na win-withdraw nila. [7:18] Dito, nag-presenta muna sila sa dalawa, tapos i-withdraw mo. [7:22] So, yun lang naman ang issue namin dito sa nangyayari na ito. [7:25] But again, we're not objecting kasi prerogatiba naman talaga ng prosecution yan. [7:30] So, ang sa amin lang is, paano na ngayon? [7:34] Which is a question, not to the prosecution, but to the court. [7:37] Sir? [7:37] Papano na ngayon? [7:37] Are we allowed to also somewhat present rebuttal evidence on all of those things? [7:46] Sir, let me be blunt with this one. [7:47] Do you feel na naisahan kayo with this kind of strategy they pulled off? [7:51] Hindi naman. [7:52] In fact, may mga rumors naman talaga na ganyan. [7:55] And I don't want to say naisahan. [7:58] Again, up to this point, I really don't want to cast aspersions against the prosecution. [8:03] I don't suppose they thought about this from the get-go that they will be doing this. [8:08] Hindi naman siguro ganun. [8:09] And I want to give them the benefit of the doubt. [8:11] So, I'm pretty sure hindi naman yun. [8:14] Maybe factors just came into play. [8:16] Maybe because nga, they said, in the interest of time and all of those things. [8:20] So, I really don't want to cast aspersions. [8:23] And I don't want to, again, still, I mean, rather, I would want to give them the benefit of the doubt up to this point. [8:29] Ang naging problema lang now is there's that, I wouldn't say gray area, pero there's that, parang we find ourselves in a conundrum. [8:40] Paano, no? Paano to? Kasi nakapresent ng ebidensya. [8:43] Diba? Yun yung tanong lang namin sa court. [8:45] What now will be your recourse to get yourself out of that conundrum? [8:49] Well, sa amin, we already stated our position. [8:52] We want to be able to present evidence even on those articles that were withdrawn [8:59] because gusto nating malaman ng ating mga kapabayan ang buong katotohanan [9:04] at hindi yung katotohanan batay sa isang panig lamang. [9:08] Diba? [9:09] But, again, we will leave that up to the court and we will see. [9:13] Kasi, very clear din naman ang naging decision ng presiding officer. [9:17] Di naman niya sinasabing totally wala. [9:19] Diba? Ang sinasabi lang niya, nasa defense yan kung anong gusto niyong ipresenta [9:25] at kung meron mga objection ang prosecution, [9:29] then they can make the proper objection at the appropriate time [9:33] which is the time we will be offering the testimony. [9:36] Cup of mind is, Jared, is there jurisprudence already to back your position [9:40] na magpapresent kayo ng evidence on articles that are already withdrawn? [9:44] Right now, I'm not aware because obviously, this has never happened before. [9:48] Sir, pero naniniwala pa po ba kayo sa patas na pagdiniti sa nangyari ngayon na nagulat? [9:58] At nagulat din ba kayo sa nangyaring decision? [10:01] Number one, yes, of course, nagulat. [10:04] May mga narinig na hugong-hugong but nothing's final until you really hear it. [10:11] And for one, yung pag-drop ng Article 3, yan naman alam na naman natin [10:16] because in fairness to the prosecution, we were given naman a formal manifestation [10:21] last week pa nga yata eh, if I remember correctly. [10:25] Pagdating sa pag-drop ng two other articles, [10:29] I wouldn't say nagulat kasi nga may mga narinig tayo from the grapevine [10:34] but in saying that, we did not expect it to really happen until it happened. [10:40] Second, patas, I wouldn't want to say hindi pa rin patas [10:44] dahil ang korte naman, nandiyan pa rin, hindi naman sila yung nag-withdraw ng articles. [10:50] They were, in fact, they took time to consider kung anong mangyayari, di ba? [10:56] Na-drop yung articles. [10:58] And on the side of the prosecution, I don't know eh. [11:01] I don't have any personal knowledge kung ano yung mga usap-usapin nila as a team. [11:06] Maaring may mga dahilan sila kung bakit nila din-drop yun. [11:10] So, sa atin, there's no point lingering on that [11:13] or even saying na naisahan because it would be unfair to them also. [11:17] I would like to maintain that disposition na sa atin, [11:22] pero ko di ba yun yung prosecution? [11:23] Ngayon, sinasabi nga ng ating lead counsel, that's their lookout, di ba? [11:28] Ah, and kami, diretsya pa rin kami kung anong plano namin i-present noon. [11:32] Yun pa rin yung plano namin ngayon. [11:34] Sir, I have to... [11:35] Sir, minamadali talaga, impeachment trial, kaya nagkaganyan na may mga drama? [11:40] Wala akong personal knowledge. [11:42] I don't want to speculate, pero hopefully naman hindi. [11:45] They're blaming the public for you using time as speech-tooth. [11:48] To... [11:48] They're blaming the public na schedule masyado na lang matagad, inanggulisa. [11:52] Ah, di naman. [11:55] I don't... [11:56] Again, I really... [11:58] You know, as colleagues and fellow officers of the court, [12:01] I don't want to say anything na ikakasama ng prosecution [12:06] or kahit sinamang abogado. [12:08] So, sa akin, I think they had the reasons [12:11] and they articulated those reasons in their manifestation earlier. [12:16] So, we'll take it at face value. [12:18] And sa atin, rather than dwell on what those reasons are [12:24] or kung meron mang agenda here and there, [12:27] I think we would rather just focus on our upcoming presentation [12:31] and prepare for whatever objections the other side may have. [12:36] Sir, as in stance, yung relaxation nitong subjudice is in effect. [12:41] So, the prosecution can already take advantage of this time [12:45] while you're comparing with your client to talk about yung kanilang mga naipresent na. [12:50] So, meron bang sense of urgency from you [12:52] to immediately come up with your position on the matter? [12:56] One, di naman siguro ay... [13:00] Well, I suppose the prosecution won't be able to really take advantage of it [13:03] because we can do the same, di ba? [13:06] In the interim, since... [13:07] Kaya nga, I needed to clarify kanina. [13:09] When I step out of this court room, [13:10] can I talk about confidential funds? [13:12] Can I talk about grave threat? [13:14] Well, for us, hindi pwede. [13:16] But can I talk about bribery? [13:18] Di ba yung mga ganong bagaya? [13:19] To clarify that at sinabi, yes. [13:21] So, if the prosecution uses this time, [13:23] I think fair naman kasi kahit naman kami, [13:24] pwede rin naman kaming magsalita. [13:26] So, again, it's not about the prosecution taking advantage [13:30] because the defense can do the same. [13:32] But, yes, I would like to... [13:34] While I wouldn't say it's urgent, [13:36] ako personally, I would like to already get the sense of the Vice President [13:39] kung ano talaga ang gusto niya dito, [13:41] ang posisyon namin. [13:41] Para nang sa ganun, [13:43] masabi na natin sa korte sa mas maagang panahon. [13:47] But, yeah, there are just really some complications [13:50] regarding yung aming grave threat [13:52] because I spoke to Attorney Paul Lim [13:55] who's the one really handling that case [13:57] kasi I only attended nung first time, [14:00] di ba, nung nag-post siya ng bail. [14:01] After that, si Attorney Paul Lim na nag-handle doon. [14:03] So, I asked him earlier kung may gag order [14:05] ba talaga kung confirmed yung gag order. [14:07] And there is a gag order. [14:09] And I remember getting a copy of that gag order a few weeks ago [14:12] so I just had to confirm with him. [14:14] And I had him resend the gag order to me. [14:16] So, meron talaga kaming gag order doon. [14:19] Attorney, two points. [14:20] Una, balikan ko lang yung naging nangyayari ngayon [14:23] yung pagdadraw, pag-withdraw doon sa tatlong artifacts. [14:27] Sa tingin niyo, sino ang mas nagrababiado or natado? [14:31] Depensa, prosecution, o taong bayan? [14:34] Well, hirap sumagod. [14:37] But I think sa akin, on the part of the defense lang, [14:40] parang syempre we had to attend here every day, [14:43] we had to confront these witnesses every day, [14:46] we had to cross-examine, di ba? [14:48] So, may mga ganong bagay plus the court, [14:50] plus, well, I don't want to say may na-agrabyado. [14:54] I really don't want to comment on things like that. [14:58] As you know, my personality, [15:00] sa akin naman, pati naman ang prosecution, [15:03] pumabasok dito every day, di ba? [15:06] Kami, pati rin sila, nag-prepare rin sila every day. [15:09] Kami rin, ganon. [15:10] Yung court rin, ganon. [15:11] So, sa akin, depende na lang siguro [15:14] sa pananaw ng tao, [15:15] kung ano ba talagang nangyayari dito. [15:17] Iwan ko na lang sa mga kababayan natin yun. [15:19] Pero sa akin, lahat naman tayo gumugol ng oras. [15:22] At bawang panig. [15:24] Prosecution, defense, and the court. [15:26] So, if there are, [15:28] I'm sure they have the reasons [15:29] on why they had to withdraw, [15:31] and that's up to them. [15:33] Come November 9, [15:35] tatalakayin ba ng depensa [15:38] yung mga issue [15:40] kaugnayin ng Article 1 and Article 3? [15:43] Maybe not necessarily November 9, [15:45] pero without preempting what we're gonna do, [15:48] definitely. [15:49] Kaya tinatanong talaga namin kanina [15:51] if we will be given that leeway [15:53] para talakayin pa rin, [15:55] and still call witnesses [15:57] in relation to those articles [16:00] that were withdrawn. [16:01] Again, bribery, walang problema eh. [16:04] Ang problema natin, [16:05] yung mga may nailabas na eh. [16:08] At kaya nga sinasabi ko kanina, [16:10] and I hope hindi ako masubjudice, no? [16:12] Pag masubjudice ako, [16:14] kayo na lang bahala na ambag sa akin. [16:17] Pero kaya ako sinasabi kanina, [16:20] there were many instances [16:21] when interpellations were being had. [16:25] I wanted to object, [16:26] but we can't, [16:28] because there are senator judges. [16:30] Many instances that the senator judge [16:32] would ask me a question, [16:33] and I wanted to respond [16:35] and already give our position, [16:37] but humihindi ako out of respect, [16:40] because sabi namin, [16:42] mas appropriate yan [16:43] pag sa presentation na ng evidence namin. [16:45] When I was on the witness stand, [16:47] I was also asked. [16:49] And I could have said something then, [16:51] because I was a witness. [16:52] But then, [16:53] sinabi ko pa rin na [16:54] it would be inappropriate. [16:56] I would rather it come out [16:57] from testimonies of our witnesses [16:59] being a defense counsel myself. [17:02] So, may mga ganong opportunities [17:04] that I could have done so, [17:05] but I didn't. [17:06] So now, [17:07] kaya namin sinasabi na [17:08] sana naman mapagbigyan din kami [17:10] to our own witnesses. [17:12] But, again, [17:14] whether mapagbigyan or hindi, [17:15] we will leave that up to the court. [17:18] Sir, without prejudice [17:19] to the wisdom of the good court, [17:22] if ever, [17:23] when will there be [17:24] a constitutional violation [17:26] of the vice president [17:28] kapag hindi mo makipinagbigyan [17:30] na makapagpresidenta rin [17:32] ng evidence on the withdrawn article? [17:34] Ano siya eh? [17:35] To be honest, [17:36] I cannot say, [17:37] and I don't want to pretend [17:38] that I am an expert on that [17:39] because walang presidente, [17:42] di ba? [17:43] Di ba nangyayari ito [17:44] sa isang impeachment proceeding? [17:46] So, I don't want to say anything [17:49] about that. [17:50] So, but due process, [17:52] obviously, [17:53] we have argued due process [17:54] since the get-go [17:55] from the answer [17:56] to the oral arguments [17:58] on the bank statements, [18:00] di ba, [18:00] and all those AMLAC records [18:01] to even the voting thresholds. [18:04] So, [18:04] there are many instances [18:06] that we were already [18:07] pointing out [18:08] to the due process issue. [18:10] But as to this [18:11] particular instance, [18:13] well, [18:14] mahirap talaga magsalita [18:15] because wala talaga tayong [18:17] pangahawakang authority. [18:19] Hindi pa nangyayari ito eh, [18:21] na may napresenta na [18:22] tapos na-withdraw. [18:23] What's that? [18:24] Attorney, [18:25] since hindi kayo makapagsalita [18:27] about grave threat, [18:28] dito na lang [18:28] sa confidential funds, [18:30] ano po sana [18:30] yung pinaka-strong evidence [18:32] that you would have presented [18:34] regarding confidential funds? [18:35] Kasi meron na rin [18:36] kung kawa-decision [18:37] regarding that. [18:38] Sa akin, [18:41] kasi nga, [18:41] hindi pa namin [18:42] ayokong ma-preempt [18:43] dahil baka [18:44] pagpigyan naman kami [18:45] na mag-presenta pa rin. [18:46] But, [18:47] just to give you an idea [18:48] dito sa confidential funds, [18:50] gusto lang namin [18:50] paintindi [18:51] sa taong bayat, [18:52] sa mga kababayan natin, [18:53] kung ano ba talaga [18:54] yung confidential funds, [18:56] kung paano ba ito ginagamit, [18:59] at kung [19:00] bakit may ganitong [19:01] mga [19:02] acknowledgement receipts, [19:04] bakit [19:05] may ganitong mga [19:06] firma, [19:07] bakit [19:07] may Mary Grace [19:08] Piatos, [19:09] bakit may [19:10] si Kuya ba yun, [19:12] Milky Si Kuya [19:13] or something, [19:14] yung mga ganong pangalan, [19:16] gusto natin ipaliwanag yan. [19:17] And then, [19:18] and then, [19:18] hayaan na natin [19:19] ang Senator Judges [19:21] at ang ating mga kababayan [19:22] na humusga [19:23] kung sa tingin nila [19:24] meron bang [19:25] katiwalian [19:26] na nangyari doon. [19:27] Yun ang gusto natin [19:28] ipaliwanag dapat. [19:30] And, [19:30] we're still hoping [19:31] to be able to do that. [19:33] Last na lang po [19:33] from my end, [19:34] yung chance [19:36] na humarap po [19:37] si BP Sarah, [19:38] mas naging strong [19:39] ba ngayon [19:39] with this decision [19:40] of the court? [19:42] Same lang [19:42] to our disposition [19:43] before. [19:47] Sa amin, [19:47] we will not disclose [19:48] at this time [19:49] kung haharap [19:50] o hindi. [19:51] But, [19:52] obviously, [19:53] may mga bagay [19:54] na gusto din namin [19:55] talagang sagutin [19:56] aside from [19:57] yung pagharap [19:58] ni BP Sarah, [19:59] gusto din namin [20:00] sagutin [20:01] even through [20:02] other witnesses. [20:04] And, [20:04] I just wanted [20:05] to comment [20:05] on yung kanina [20:06] na hindi naman [20:09] humaharap [20:09] si BP Sarah [20:10] dito. [20:11] May nabanggit [20:12] kasi na ganun. [20:13] But, [20:14] anong gagawin niya [20:15] dito [20:15] pag humaharap [20:15] siya dito [20:16] ngayon? [20:16] Wala, [20:17] diba? [20:18] Kasi hindi naman [20:18] siya witness. [20:20] Siya ang respondent [20:20] pero hindi naman [20:21] siya witness. [20:21] Hindi naman [20:22] siya upo [20:22] sa witness stand. [20:24] So, [20:25] I think [20:26] it's a bit unfair [20:27] to say [20:27] the Vice President [20:28] ay hindi [20:29] mag-attend dito [20:30] dahil hindi naman [20:30] talagang dapat [20:31] siya mag-attend [20:33] hindi naman siya [20:33] makakapagsalita. [20:34] Abogado lang naman [20:35] niyang makakapagsalita [20:36] and the witnesses [20:37] for the day. [20:38] So, [20:39] yung pagharap [20:40] ni BP Sarah [20:40] ginagawa niya [20:41] through [20:42] kanyang mga abogado [20:43] dahil nga [20:44] at this point [20:44] presentation pa lang [20:45] ng prosecution [20:46] and all we can do [20:47] is cross-examine. [20:49] Sir, [20:49] help me reconcile. [20:50] Magkaiba kasi [20:51] yung tone niya [20:51] ni Attorney Sheila. [20:52] You said na [20:53] ayaw ko naman [20:54] sabihin na may [20:54] naagrabyado [20:55] while your [20:56] lead defense counsel [20:57] says [20:58] she calls it [20:59] a modern-day [21:00] persecution. [21:02] No, [21:02] she was quoting [21:03] our answer. [21:03] That was her answer. [21:05] That was our [21:06] answer to the [21:08] articles of impeachment. [21:09] But she was calling [21:10] the sudden removal [21:11] or dropping [21:12] of the three articles [21:13] as an unregulated [21:14] and she was [21:16] basically airing out [21:17] her frustration [21:18] earlier [21:18] while you, [21:19] on the other hand, [21:20] seemingly [21:20] is still [21:22] trying to be [21:23] quite [21:23] not as abrasive. [21:25] what is the general [21:28] sentiment of your [21:29] fellow defense [21:30] counsels, [21:31] aside from you [21:32] as a spokesperson? [21:32] Well, [21:33] number one, [21:34] she was not [21:35] commenting on the [21:36] dropping [21:36] when she said [21:37] that. [21:37] She was [21:37] commenting on [21:38] Rule 18. [21:39] That was the [21:40] issue then [21:41] and the records [21:43] would bear us [21:43] out. [21:44] Secondly, [21:45] the word [21:45] persecution [21:46] and that's [21:47] why it also [21:47] wasn't stricken [21:48] off the record [21:48] was part [21:49] of our [21:49] answer. [21:51] And at [21:51] this point, [21:52] even that [21:52] we can't [21:53] talk about [21:53] because [21:53] that one [21:54] we might [21:55] present [21:55] on [21:56] persecution. [21:57] Secondly, [22:06] I don't think [22:07] there's anything [22:08] contradicting [22:09] with what I'm [22:09] saying and [22:10] what she's [22:10] saying because [22:11] she said it [22:12] in open [22:12] court while [22:13] I'm saying [22:13] it to [22:14] the media. [22:15] And [22:16] dito, [22:17] we just [22:17] also, [22:18] ako naman, [22:18] we want [22:19] to give [22:20] while we [22:22] voiced out [22:24] our position [22:24] in court, [22:25] pagdating sa [22:26] media, [22:27] we are [22:27] voicing out [22:28] our position [22:28] but we [22:29] also [22:29] don't want [22:29] to cast [22:30] aspersions [22:30] against [22:30] the other [22:31] side. [22:31] Kasi [22:31] nga, [22:32] kahit [22:33] na sabihin [22:34] natin [22:34] na ganito [22:35] yung [22:35] stand [22:36] natin, [22:36] hindi [22:36] naman [22:37] natin [22:37] alam [22:37] kung bakit [22:37] nag-withdraw [22:38] yung [22:38] kabila. [22:39] May [22:39] sarili silang [22:39] reasons [22:40] for that. [22:41] So, [22:41] the fact [22:42] of [22:42] withdrawal [22:42] is not [22:43] what we [22:43] meant [22:44] by [22:44] persecution. [22:45] Persecution [22:46] goes way [22:46] deeper [22:47] than that. [22:48] Attorney, [22:49] sa din yung [22:49] withdrawal, [22:50] pero [22:51] napagkid [22:52] nyo na [22:52] before [22:52] 30 [22:53] trial days [22:54] at least [22:54] yung [22:54] kailangan [22:55] nyo [22:55] doon [22:56] sa [22:56] abat [22:56] ng [22:56] articles. [22:58] Ngayon, [22:58] isa na [22:58] lang yung [22:59] natitira. [22:59] Mga [22:59] how many [23:00] trial days [23:01] po ang [23:01] estimating nyo? [23:02] Again, [23:03] hindi ko [23:03] talaga [23:03] masasagot [23:04] yung [23:04] ilang [23:04] trial days [23:05] because [23:06] quite [23:07] practically [23:08] just [23:08] because [23:08] I don't [23:09] want [23:09] to [23:09] give [23:09] a [23:09] statement [23:10] and [23:10] then [23:11] hindi [23:11] siya [23:11] maging [23:11] accurate [23:12] because [23:12] we [23:12] might [23:12] need [23:12] to [23:13] adjust [23:13] in [23:13] the [23:13] future. [23:15] Second, [23:15] who [23:15] knows, [23:16] we [23:16] might [23:16] even [23:16] use up [23:18] all [23:18] the [23:19] time [23:19] that we [23:19] need [23:19] to [23:20] present [23:20] for [23:21] Article [23:22] 2. [23:23] So, [23:24] sa ngayon, [23:24] hindi ko [23:24] masasabi. [23:25] Sir, [23:25] would you [23:26] consider [23:26] this [23:27] decision [23:27] as [23:28] whimsical? [23:29] Is it [23:29] something [23:29] that [23:30] merits [23:30] the [23:31] decision [23:31] of the [23:32] Supreme [23:32] Court? [23:32] Which [23:33] decision, [23:34] Ms. [23:34] Kat? [23:34] First, [23:35] the dropping, [23:36] second, [23:36] the agreement [23:37] of the [23:37] Senate [23:38] Impeachment [23:38] Court [23:39] to allow [23:39] them to [23:40] drop [23:40] without [23:40] you [23:41] probably [23:41] presenting [23:42] your [23:42] own [23:42] sets [23:43] of [23:43] witnesses [23:44] and [23:44] pieces [23:44] of [23:45] evidence? [23:45] I will [23:45] reserve [23:46] comment on [23:47] that [23:47] at the [23:47] moment [23:47] because [23:49] remedies [23:50] available [23:50] to [23:51] us. [23:52] But [23:52] I [23:52] wouldn't [23:53] want [23:55] to [23:55] say [23:55] whimsical. [23:56] I mean, [23:57] nagkaroon [23:57] naman [23:57] ng [23:57] manifestation, [23:59] nagusap [24:00] ang mga [24:00] senator [24:00] judges, [24:01] but [24:01] whether [24:02] it [24:03] affects [24:03] the [24:03] due [24:03] process [24:04] of [24:04] the [24:04] vice [24:05] president [24:05] is [24:05] something [24:05] I [24:06] will [24:06] not [24:06] comment [24:06] yet [24:06] at [24:07] the [24:07] moment [24:07] on. [24:09] But [24:09] in [24:10] all [24:10] fairness, [24:12] the [24:12] impeachment [24:13] court [24:13] tried [24:14] to [24:14] at [24:14] least [24:14] put [24:17] things [24:17] in [24:17] order [24:17] by [24:18] saying [24:18] that [24:18] they [24:18] have [24:19] control [24:19] over [24:20] whether [24:20] the [24:20] articles [24:20] can [24:21] be [24:21] withdrawn [24:21] or [24:21] not [24:22] and [24:22] that [24:22] they [24:23] are [24:23] considering [24:24] the [24:24] manifestation [24:24] as a [24:25] motion [24:25] and [24:26] they [24:26] decided [24:27] and [24:27] there [24:27] was [24:27] a [24:28] rule [24:28] 18 [24:29] issue [24:30] and [24:31] to be [24:32] honest, [24:32] I think [24:32] they were [24:32] trying [24:33] their [24:33] best. [24:33] The [24:33] court [24:34] was [24:34] trying [24:34] its [24:34] best [24:34] to [24:35] balance [24:36] the [24:37] situation. [24:37] Sino [24:37] po [24:38] sana [24:38] yung [24:38] gusto [24:38] nyo [24:38] maipasapina [24:39] to [24:40] court [24:40] na [24:40] hindi [24:41] nyo [24:41] magagawa [24:42] in [24:42] a [24:42] simple [24:42] press [24:43] conference? [24:43] High [24:43] officials [24:44] of [24:44] government. [24:46] What [24:46] government [24:46] agencies? [24:47] I [24:51] the [24:51] last [24:52] minute. [24:53] How [24:54] high [24:54] yung [24:54] official [24:55] na yun, [24:55] sir? [24:56] Mataas na [24:56] mataas pa? [24:57] Well, [24:57] nakasulat [24:58] naman yan [24:58] sa [24:58] pre-trial [24:59] brief [24:59] namin. [25:00] Marami [25:01] naman [25:01] diyang [25:01] gusto [25:01] namin [25:02] ipatawag. [25:03] But [25:03] not to [25:04] again. [25:05] When we [25:06] call [25:06] witnesses, [25:07] hindi [25:07] pa [25:07] to [25:08] create [25:09] any [25:09] issue [25:10] out [25:10] of [25:10] them. [25:10] Minsan, [25:11] importante [25:11] lang [25:11] talaga [25:11] yung [25:12] desimonyan [25:12] nila [25:12] kasi [25:13] sila [25:13] may [25:13] alam [25:13] dun [25:14] sa [25:14] proseso. [25:15] So, [25:17] sayang. [25:17] Hindi ba [25:19] advantage [25:21] sa inyo [25:22] na isa na lang [25:22] yung [25:23] kailangan [25:23] niyong [25:24] i-argue [25:25] na [25:25] kahit [25:25] na case? [25:26] Hindi rin [25:28] sa totoo [25:28] lang. [25:30] Sa atin, [25:30] sabi nga [25:31] natin, [25:32] kung anong [25:32] man yung [25:32] article, [25:33] hindi [25:33] natin [25:33] underestimate [25:34] ni isa [25:35] dyan. [25:35] Pero [25:35] kaya [25:36] po hindi [25:36] sinasabi [25:36] na [25:37] advantage [25:37] sa amin [25:38] kahit [25:38] isang [25:38] article [25:39] lang. [25:39] Kasi [25:39] yung [25:40] ibang [25:40] articles [25:41] kasi [25:41] if I [25:43] may [25:43] say [25:43] bluntly, [25:44] nasiraan [25:44] mo na [25:45] yung [25:45] kliyente [25:45] ko. [25:46] So, [25:47] hindi naman kami [25:48] papayag [25:48] na [25:48] gano'n. [25:50] So, [25:50] kailangan sumagot [25:51] rin kami. [25:52] But, [25:53] again, [25:54] sa akin, [25:55] and I want [25:56] to be fair [25:57] to the [25:57] prosecution, [25:58] they presented [25:59] their evidence [26:00] in accordance [26:01] with their [26:02] strategy. [26:04] We wanted [26:05] to present [26:05] rebuttal [26:06] evidence. [26:06] That's all [26:07] we wanted. [26:08] Yun lang. [26:08] One of the [26:08] prosecutors [26:09] is saying [26:10] na the [26:10] defense [26:10] should be [26:11] flexible. [26:11] That's [26:12] exact [26:12] code [26:12] just a [26:13] while [26:13] ago. [26:13] Okay [26:14] lang. [26:14] Tama [26:14] naman yun. [26:15] The defense [26:15] should be [26:16] flexible, [26:16] but the [26:17] defense can [26:18] also [26:18] cannot be [26:19] dictated as [26:20] to how [26:20] it will [26:21] present [26:21] its [26:21] evidence. [26:22] Sir, [26:24] ang sabi [26:24] general [26:25] sentiment [26:25] na short [26:26] change [26:27] kayo [26:28] sa [26:28] naging [26:28] move [26:29] ng [26:29] prosecution, [26:30] although [26:30] hindi nyo [26:31] po [26:31] sinasabi, [26:32] sa palagay nyo [26:33] po ba [26:33] may [26:34] positive [26:34] na [26:35] mangyayari [26:36] on your [26:36] part [26:37] dito sa [26:37] nangyayari [26:38] po nito? [26:39] Na it will [26:39] work on [26:40] your [26:40] favor po? [26:40] Well, [26:43] sa atin [26:44] naman, [26:45] siyempre, [26:46] magpafocus [26:47] lang dapat [26:48] tayo [26:48] in a normal [26:48] course of [26:49] things, [26:49] magpafocus [26:50] tayo [26:50] on article [26:50] 2. [26:51] So, [26:52] in a way, [26:53] concentrated [26:53] yung energy [26:55] natin [26:55] dito sa [26:55] article 2. [26:56] But, [26:57] the problem [26:57] here is, [26:58] yun nga eh, [26:59] withdrawal, [27:02] wala sanang [27:02] problema [27:03] kasi [27:03] hindi pa [27:04] napresenta [27:04] yung mga [27:04] ebidensya [27:05] for [27:06] the other [27:06] articles. [27:07] Pero dito, [27:08] hindi ko pa [27:09] masapin [27:09] advantageous [27:10] sa amin [27:10] to. [27:11] Dahil nga, [27:12] ang sa akin, [27:13] naglabas [27:15] ng mga [27:16] testimonya [27:16] laban [27:17] sa aming [27:18] kliente [27:18] dito sa [27:19] article 1 [27:20] and article [27:22] 4. [27:25] So, [27:25] siyempre, [27:26] para makita [27:27] ng taong [27:27] bayan [27:28] yung buong [27:29] katotohanan, [27:30] gusto rin namin [27:31] sana namin [27:31] mabigyan kami [27:32] ng pagkakataon [27:34] na maglabas [27:35] din ng [27:35] ebidensya [27:36] namin [27:36] to rebate [27:37] lahat [27:37] ng mga [27:38] lumabas [27:38] ng testimonya [27:39] laban [27:39] sa kanya. [27:41] So, [27:41] sa ngayon, [27:41] hindi ko pa [27:42] nakikita [27:43] yung [27:43] advantage. [27:44] Maybe [27:45] in a [27:47] normal [27:47] impeachment [27:48] proceeding [27:48] wherein [27:49] articles [27:50] are withdrawn [27:50] prior to [27:51] the [27:51] presentation [27:52] of their [27:52] evidence [27:53] in chief, [27:54] okay yun, [27:55] kasi umigli [27:56] yung [27:57] pag-uusapan [27:58] nating issue, [28:00] ito na lang [28:00] yung mga [28:01] kailangan [28:01] nating [28:01] pagtalunan, [28:03] di ba? [28:03] Pero dito [28:03] kasi iba yung [28:04] nangyari. [28:05] Sir, [28:06] may regrets ba [28:07] na hindi nyo [28:07] inavel yung [28:08] per-article [28:09] presentation [28:10] na [28:10] project [28:10] defense, [28:11] project [28:11] denotes? [28:12] Wala. [28:12] Kasi, [28:13] you know, [28:14] the issue [28:16] on why [28:17] we did not [28:17] agree to that [28:18] was because [28:19] of the [28:19] burden [28:19] of proof, [28:20] di ba? [28:21] Kailangan [28:21] ilatag mo [28:22] muna eh, [28:23] kasi nakita [28:24] nyo ngayon [28:24] yung formal [28:25] offer of [28:25] evidence, [28:26] di ba? [28:26] Kailangan [28:27] ilatag nyo [28:27] muna [28:28] lahat [28:29] ng [28:29] mga [28:30] epidensya. [28:31] Magkaroon [28:31] ng formal [28:32] offer, [28:32] alam namin [28:33] kung ano [28:33] yung [28:34] inadmit [28:34] ng [28:34] korte [28:35] na [28:35] epidensya [28:36] bago [28:37] kami [28:37] sasagot, [28:39] di ba? [28:39] So, [28:39] yung [28:40] pagganong [28:40] prosecution [28:43] defense, [28:44] prosecution [28:44] defense, [28:45] sa amin [28:45] at that [28:46] time, [28:46] and even [28:46] until now, [28:47] we stand [28:47] by it, [28:48] it goes [28:50] against [28:51] the very [28:51] principle [28:52] of where [28:52] the burden [28:53] of [28:53] proof [28:53] lies. [28:54] And [28:55] ano bang [28:56] mangyari [28:56] na magkakaroon [28:57] ba ng [28:57] formal [28:57] offer [28:57] every [28:58] time? [28:58] Di, [28:59] hahaba [28:59] din yun. [29:01] It's hard. [29:01] Of course, [29:02] you can say [29:03] in hindsight, [29:04] all this [29:04] and that, [29:05] pero sa [29:05] ngayon, [29:05] sa amin, [29:06] pinanindigan pa [29:07] rin namin [29:07] yung [29:07] desisyon [29:07] namin [29:08] na yun. [29:08] Because [29:08] the presumption [29:10] is when [29:10] you file [29:10] articles of [29:11] impeachment [29:11] that you [29:12] will prove [29:12] each and [29:12] every [29:13] one [29:13] of [29:13] them. [29:13] Di ba? [29:16] Thank you. [29:28] Oh, [29:31] si, [29:31] balana il [29:31] live.