VP Sara's remarks about harming Marcos an admission against interest —prosecution

Vice President Sara Duterte’s multiple statements that she ordered a kill job on President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., First Lady Liza Marcos and former Speaker and Leyte Rep. Martin Romualdez, aside from wanting to cut the head of the Chief Executive, are all admissions against her interest.

The prosecution took the position in response to the defense, citing differing docket numbers in the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) reports, when prosecution witness and lawyer Jeremy Lotoc, formerly of the NBI Cybercrime Division, took the stand on Monday, July 14.

“What is consistent here is the fact that the Vice President never denied her statements in the November 2024 press conference and it was not denied in the answer and even after three days when she was asked about this, she had an opportunity to clarify her statement and there is no agreement to kill, sabihin niyang hindi biro biro lang ito, she did not take it back,” private prosector Benjamin Tolosa Jr, said in a press conference.

“She did not deny it, and she doubled down by trying to justify her statement, explaining or posing the question: Is revenge from the grave a criminal act? She never took it back that she already hired a hitman despite the repeated opportunities to do so. That kind of evidence is called admission against interest,” Tolosa added.

The Vice President’s words in the 2024 press conference went, "Huwag kang mag-alala, Ma'am sa security ko, kasi may kinausap na ako na tao. Sabi ko sa kanya, kapag pinatay ako, patayin mo si BBM, si Liza Araneta, at si Martin Romualdez.”

(Don't worry about my security because I have already spoken to someone. I told that person that if I am killed, kill BBM, Liza Araneta, and Martin Romualdez.)

"No joke, no joke. Nagbilin na ako, Ma'am. 'Pag mamatay ako, sabi ko, huwag ka tumigil hanggang hindi mo mapatay sila. And he said yes."

(No joke. I already gave instructions that if I die, don't stop until you have killed them.)

An admission against interest, Tolosa said, is sufficient proof of an impeachable offense.

“In criminal cases, usually, to convict [an accused], an admission against interest has to be coupled with the corpus delicti, meaning dapat talagang mapakita na nangyari talaga ang krimen aside from the admission. Pero hindi ho ito criminal case. And that is why our position is that in an impeachment case, matibay itong ebidensiya,” Tolosa added.

Prosecutor Terry Ridon of Bicol Saro party-list agreed, saying that such non-merit-based citations of the defense failed to deny the prosecution’s allegations.

“Even if they raise such things, it did not diminish the threat itself. This is the point here: the threat against the President and his family. Regardless of docket numbers, they do not change the fact that there was someone who made threats, that threats were made, and that there were threats and people were threatened,” Ridon said.

“All that has been said so far supports the argument of the prosecution,” Ridon added.

House Deputy Speaker Jannette Garin of Iloilo could not agree more.

“The video is not AI, it was not manipulated; it was not altered. It was the Vice President who was speaking on the video. That's all there is to see,” Garin said.—LDF, GMA News