Si Filosofo Tasyo ay patuloy sa pagpilosopo
The current impeachment trial of CJ Corona is a display of how byzantine the rules of court, and court proceedings are. However looking closely, the rules of court follows strict logic, cause and effect, clear logic, and relevance.
This is the same stuff taught in case method and case analysis.
Relevance: In the issue of the probity of the CJ why was the evidence on the perks at PAL disregarded?
Clarity of thinking Why was the issue of ill gotten thrown off in the presentation of SALN?
How has the defense exploited these flaws and weaknesses of the prosecution? What is the lesson for the prosecution? How will they pick up the pieces?
The Presiding Judge did not consider the junking of the complaint and instead having a pre trial on the theory that the impeachment charge was hastily done and not read by the congressmen who signed the complaint. As it it is, this is the case. How many times was Cong Tupas challenged to change the complaint to include the evidence being presented?
As for the FCD, the senators can not risk violating the law. It is guaranteed by the law that no such inquiry is to be made.
Now it is coming out that the bank deposit accounts copies were illegally obtained (through AMLA) and that there discrepancies (and therefore there are doubts cast on the evidences (which by far are the most damaging). Do not be shocked if the deposit accounts at PSB are to be considered illegally obtained and are thus to be disregarded.
As for Sen Santiago, she really has one of the brilliant minds there is among the judges. Do not mistake her tirades for anything else. She knows her laws very well, and the young prosecutors dont.
As for the commentators in the TV shows, the lawyers there who make their commentaries for and against either side does not help one peel the truth.
On the influencing of the decision of SC, it is correct to say that the Sec of Justice testimony are mere hearsays and do not have any consequence to the complaint.
As it is, is the prosecution or the defense that has the upper hand?
That is why it is correct to say that the one who wins has the best lawyer. As it is my admiration goes to the defense.
