6 accused in missing sabungeros case allowed to post bail

Six of the accused in the disappearance of six missing sabungeros have been allowed to post bail by the Manila Regional Trial Court, Senior Deputy State Prosecutor Richard Fadullon said on Friday. 

Fadullon told GMA News Online that bail was set at P3 million each—P500,000 for each case of missing person—for accused Julie Patidongan, Gleer Codilla, Mark Carlo Zabala, Virgilio Bayog, Johnny Consolacion, and Roberto Matillano Jr. 

The six are facing six counts of kidnapping and serious illegal detention over the disappearance of sabungeros John Claude Inonog, Rondel Cristorum, Mark Joseph Velasco, Rowel Gomez, and brothers James Baccay and Marlon Baccay. 

The sabungeros left Tanay, Rizal at 1 p.m. on January 13, 2022, to go to the Manila Arena but were forced to board a gray van at around 7:30 p.m.

According to Fadullon, the prosecution was unable to prove three out of four elements that are needed to show if an individual was kidnapped or illegally detained.

“Kasi ang huling alam lamang ng testigo is that nakita niyang sinasakay doon sa loob ng mga van. At nung tinanong sila kung may pumwersa, pananakot, o sila ay tinutukan habang ito ay ginagawa, wala naman daw silang nakita na ganon,” he said in an ambush interview.

(Because the last knowledge of the witness was that they saw the sabungeros being loaded into the van. When they asked if there was a show of force, intimidation, or if a gun was pointed at them while this was happening. They said they didn’t see anything.)

He said the court also gave weight to the families’ withdrawal from the case.

“Mabigat ‘yung pag urong kasi parang lalabas doon sila naman ‘yung mga principal complaints, sila ‘yung merong magulang doon na nakausap habang nangyayari ‘yung insidente,” he said.

(The withdrawal was a big deal because they are the principal complainants. They were able to talk to the parents while the incident was happening.)

“So naturally kung halimbawang iuurong nila, ibig sabihin non hindi na rin magsasalita, hindi na rin tetestigo, yung mga kamaganak na iyon,” he added.

(So, for example, if they withdraw, this means those family members will no longer talk about it, they will no longer testify.)

He said the prosecution may still file a motion for reconsideration, but this will not stop the bail process of the accused.

Fadullon said the next hearing in February will be for the prosecution’s presentation of evidence.

Meanwhile, when sought for comment, Jaja Pilarta, the partner of Inonog, said she was not happy with the decision.

“Sa akin po masama yung loob ko. Syempre lalo na rin sa mga anak ni Claude. Hindi na namin alam kung sino pa ‘yung mga taong pwede naming lapitan. Kasi parang ganon din ‘yung sitwasyon eh,” Pilarta said. 

(I’m not happy with it. Especially Claude’s children. We don’t know who we can approach because the situation stays the same.) 

“Lahat ng nilapitan namin na nangako na tutulong-tutulong, parang ang ending patatagalin nila tapos ang ano amin ganon pa rin, parang nasa kalaban pa din ‘yung ano, ‘yung ikot ng mundo, nandoon pa rin sa kanilang pabor,” she said. 

(Everyone we approach promises us that they will help, but it seems in the end, they will prolong it and then it will end favorably on the part of the accused.) 

Pilarta also said they could not help it if they lost hope. 

“Kasi ganyan nga ‘yung laging nangyayari, laging nagiging pabor sa kalaban yung ano, sistema eh pagdating sa kaso namin. Pero siguro meron pa rin kahit katiting na pagasa para makuha namin yung hustisya para sa mga taong hinahanap namin,” she said. 

(Because this always happens, the system always ends up being in favor of the accused in our case. But I guess there’s still some hope that we will attain justice for those who we are looking for.) 

She also hoped that she and the other families would be explained the decision.

For his part, Fadullon said the prosecution is only as good as the evidence available.

“Well, sa simula’t sapul naman sinasabi natin na gagawin ng department ang lahat ng pwede niyang gawing para mailahad ang ebidensya na meron tayo,” the prosecutor said.

(Well, right from the start, the department said that it would do everything to lay down the evidence that we have.)

“Pero dapat din natin tanggapin yung punto na ang prosecutor ay kasing husay lamang ng ebidensya na meron siya. Sa kahuli-hulihan, ang husgado pa rin ang mag de-desisyon,” he added.

(But we also need to accept the point that a prosecutor is only as good as the evidence that he has. In the end, it is still up to the courts to decide.)

He said that through this, prosecutors may be able to fill in the gaps next time to prevent a similar ruling. 

“Siguro nakita natin, learning from this lesson, kung ano ‘yung kulang dito ‘yan ang mga bagay na sana mapunuan natin sa mga kaso nila nang sa ganon hindi na sabihin yung parehong resulta,” he said.

(Learning from this lesson, we see what is lacking that we need to address in their cases so that a similar ruling will not occur.) 

In a separate message, the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group said the legal counsel of the accused is currently completing the requirements for bail. —NB, GMA Integrated News