Slain Leviste aide shot at point-blank - forensic expert

MANILA, Philippines - Rafael de las Alas, the slain aide of former Batangas governor Antonio Leviste, could have been shot on the forehead at close range, a forensic expert who testified during Wednesday’s resumption of Leviste’s murder trial said. Dr Ernesto Gimenez, who was a medico-legal officer in the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) from 1965 to 1977, testified that the “stellate” (star-shaped) quality of De Las Alas’ wound on the forehead showed that it was inflicted at point-blank range. “That is a contact wound. The muzzle must not be more than one inch away from the forehead to achieve this kind of wound,” Gimenez said, adding that he based his opinion from the photos of the crime scene shown to him by the prosecution. “Based on my experience as medico-legal officer, any gunshot to the head is considered fatal. It may not cause death instantaneously but it will ultimately lead to death,” he added. He also pointed out that a head shot could render a person unconscious at the very least, and therefore “no longer capable of other faculties.” Gimenez’s testimony ran contradictory to that of Leviste who in January 23 testified that he was a table’s distance away from the victim. In the same testimony, Leviste claimed he killed De las Alas in self-defense in the morning of January 12, 2007, when the latter arrived “early for work, armed and in a combative mood.” The accused narrated that he repeatedly shot De Las Alas for fear that he might still be able to fire at him even after beating him to the draw. Aside from the four head wounds, De las Alas also bore a “flesh wound” in the left forearm. Senior State Prosecutor Emmanuel Velasco, through the witness, tried to make an impression to Presiding Judge Elmo Alameda that even one bullet was enough to disable the victim, somewhat suggesting an overkill on Leviste’s part. As for the forearm injury, Gimenez said it was not fatal in itself “but the trajectory of the bullet suggests that it passed through the forearm and then landed” on the victim’s face. Gimenez said it would be “impossible” for someone in that state to fire a gun. The former NBI officer also noted that the varied positions of the victim, as shown in the photos, suggests that he was loosely holding his handgun, not in a manner that was “ready to shoot,” as claimed by the defense panel. “Parang ilinagay lang sa kamay ng biktima (Seems like somebody put the gun in his hand),” he said. For their part, the defense panel led by lawyer Henry Capela assailed the witness’ knack for making conclusions by merely looking at pictures of the crime scene. Capela, on numerous occasions, questioned Gimenez’s competency to testify, saying that the latter “was no longer an expert” since it has been 30 years when he was a medico-legal officer. Meanwhile, Leviste, who attended the trial, said he was “disappointed” about Gimenez’s contact wound theory, adding that the defense chose to forego cross-examination because the witness’ statement “was not worth a grain of salt.” “He is a piece of high-falluting non-sense. Velasco went out to orbit with this one,” the ex-governor said. - GMANews.TV