Lawyers for Vice President Sara Duterte walked out of the third day of her impeachment trial convinced they had gotten what they came for, though their spokesperson stopped short of declaring victory over the other side.
“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 nanalo ba kami today or yesterday or ano? I really don’t want to do that,” Atty. Michael Poa told reporters.
The rating came after Atty. CJ Narvasa handled the questioning of the prosecution’s first witness. Poa singled out his colleague for the work.
“I’d like to thank my co-counsel, Atty. CJ Narvasa — who we feel, did really a good job sa kanyang cross examination,” he said.
Among the items the defense wanted surfaced, Poa said, were the parameters of the investigation conducted, portions of video that supply context, and the character of the investigative affidavit. He declined to go further, saying anything more would touch the merits of the case.
“Marami kaming mga gustong lumabas, for example, ‘yung set ng investigation na ginawa, mga parts ng video that would provide context. And also, ‘yung nature ng affidavit of investigation… Pagdating naman don sa punto na gusto naming tumbukin doon, hindi ko na lang idi-discuss because that would really go to the merits so sa factual lang tayo,” he said.
The recording at the center of the day’s arguments captures a 2024 virtual press conference in which the prosecution says the vice president threatened the life of the president. Poa argued that its origin has to be established before it can carry any weight.
“Ang ebidensiya, hindi naman yan puwedeng maglakad mag-isa papunta sa korte,” he said. “So you need someone to identify it, to authenticate it.”
He said the material shown in court must be checked against the original Zoom session.
“Pagdating sa video, siyempre, gusto natin malaman saan nila nakuha yung video, lalo na sa panahon na ito,” he added. “Kailangan natin makasigurado na authenticated yung video. Importante na ma-compare yung Zoom video dun sa pinapakitang video sa atin, para masabi natin na talagang faithful yung videos na talagang yun talaga yung video o ‘yun yung Zoom press conference.”
A day earlier, the defense had questioned why the prosecution stopped short of showing the entire two-hour recording. It then made the same choice during its own turn, a decision Poa said was tied to the witness on the stand rather than to any position on the footage itself.
“Kanina, ang inisip namin hindi naman na kailangan 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 2-hour video for some other witness. I’m not saying we will, I’m not saying we won’t,” he said.
