The only real consuelo I can offer to the Lynch Mob is the news that the US Military may court martial Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith, probably for causing so much trouble between two old allies and giving the Lynch Mob such a golden opportunity for propaganda.
But it may be a form of much needed consolation, or perhaps psychological and emotional relief, for some to insist that Smith’s Trial Conviction by the RTC was merely “reversed” by the Court of Appeals and make some dark insinuations as to how that came about. It’s a way of saying he is guilty anyway. But this is like in a basketball game, where our team is leading at halftime but then we blame the Referees for cheating and unjustly reversing the outcome of the game when our team gets blown out by twenty points in the Second Half. But the Lynch Mob set itself up for this by intentionally refusing to understand a key concept and principle: the Presumption of Innocence.
The widespread and pitiful angst of the Lynch Mob over “Nicole” and the Court of Appeals decision to acquit the Accused, is due to a confusion over principles and a lack of ethical and intellectual rigorousness in their appreciation of a principle like the Presumption of Innocence.
The Presumption of Innocence of a criminally accused person is overcome in a Judge’s mind only when he or she finds “moral certainty” of guilt. It is a subjective phenomenon, this finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, for “doubt” can only exist in the human mind. So when the RTC judge Ben Pozon could not find such reasonable doubt in his own mind and convicted the accused of rape, THAT was not the act of conviction against the accused that the Presumption of Innocence is concerned about. The same level of moral certainty must be found by the three judges of the CA, and the 15 of SCoRP before the Court can ACT to overcome the Presumption of Innocence and deprive the accused, finally of his very freedom, for life. The trial conviction is merely the VOTE of the RTC judge for the Court to uphold the Law and punish the accused for his crime.
Like the Congress passing a law where House and Senate must vote to approve the proposed legislation separately, a conviction in a capital prosecution must be approved by three bodies with increasing degrees of oversight, collegiality and participants: RTC (1 judge); CA (3 judges); (15 judges SCoRP).
If one does not uphold and respect the Presumption of Innocence through all stages of trial and appeal, one ends up embarrassing oneself when something like this happens because now one is left with blaming the judges involved and calling them unjust for “reversing” the Lower Court , or bought out, or sold out–every reason but the truth, that the Lady Justices in this case, could not find moral certainty IN THEIR OWN MINDS that the accused is guilty.
Now this is a matter of legal principle that every citizen and blogger ought to understand. The RTC judge may have found the accused “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt” but all this means is that in his own mind he found moral certainty that Smith was guilty. But to say that the Justice System or “the Court” as the Constitution refers to it, has already “acted” to convict Smith is utterly wrong. It is precisely like the claim that the Lower House alone on the strength of numbers can pass a law without Senate approval. No! The RTC has no power to “convict” Smith without the CA and SCoRP doing the same and upon a greater quantum of proof and evidence since the higher courts must consider and uphold also the actions and behavior of the lower courts.
The reason the Lynch Mob was able to arise like a dust devil in a moral desert is that from the beginning the right of the accused to privacy about his identity and personal history was wantonly violated, first by Evalyn Ursua and the Mass Media, who all inconsistently protected Nicole’s identify with a fierce devotion but led in calling Smith a rapist and still do.
This delusion was only possible because of the unethical proclivities of the Media, which was willing to abet such hypocrisy and illegal unequal treatment of accuser and accused out of “nationalism.”
And they are shameless — utterly shameless. Even when it has now become obvious to the common tao how wrong these Lynch Mobs are to make Rash Judgment and Racial Prejudice their twin gods, they would churn the waters making wild accusations against the Lady judges who rendered the decision.
Popularity: 2% [?]
Dean, as Benny would say, "stidi ka lang diyan."
Well, what did you expect? You are in the fantasy mindset known as Pinoyland. Do I need to elaborate? One word: BAMBEE. How about two: CHIP TSAO. I hate to agree with Benny but this is small mind syndrome out in the open.
C'mon dude. You and I know that Benny is right. Pinoys need a serious reality check.
See you at Starbucks :)
DJB,
There you goo again with your presumption of innocence spiel. You advocate shooting suspected kidmappers, you advocate torture for suspected Al Qaeda members. Cut the shit, your hypocrisy is too much
Manong Dean,
I was waiting for this "consolation" post.
Here's my reply:
http://midfield.wordpress.com/2009/04/25/good-rid...
Okay, you never had the fire/brimstone anger of the Lynch Mob, but DJB, the blogosphere will have several instances where you have agreed with Regional Trial Court decision, to include that Smith should spend time instead in USA instead of Muntinglupa.
and DJB… explain again how Evalyn Ursua can perform her role —- Nicole's lawyer tasked to convict a rapist —- and be on this "…. yes, I believe that the handsome white dude is innocent" blabber????
Let me comment DJB.
One. As your blog's title would seem to indicate, the lynch mob will find comfort in the knowledge that Daniel Smith will be tried by a US Military Court just the same. But then, who would still know and even care about it?
Two. Is there any kind of psychological or emotional relief in knowing that the conviction of the RTC on Smith was "merely reversed" by the Court of Appeals as though in so stating, the consequences of a reversal is not where one who is convicted is acquitted? I cannot follow your drift, Mister.
Three. A case like that cannot be compared to a basketball game.
Four. It is dangerous to posit that moral certainty is a subjective phenomenon or that doubt all resides in the mind. And clearly moral certainty could not have been built on mere numbers – say two to three more judges voting. The operative word voting is misleading. There is only judge in an RTC. Suppose there are only 1 judge in a Court of Appeals? in the Supreme Court?
Five. To keep positing of the ontological existence of moral certainty in one's mind is inconsistent with the other processes of a criminal case such as the evidence, the testimony, the corroborative processs, et cetera. If judgment is based on a purely subjective criterion, what need is there for a case to lag for many months and years?
All told, we should try to abandon our worldview when it no longer holds water. When it no longer creates ripple in the sea. You are not all too clear on this phenomenon of presumption of innocence being ovecome by sheer single or multiple vote.
Five.
Check out these two URL's:
The first contains the usual "Obama-made-a-phone-call" blabber, (not from Ellen…. from bitchevil)
and acquittal-is-because-of-VFA (Verifiably Foolish Americans):
http://www.ellentordesillas.com/?p=5141#more-5141
And this one is to be followed :
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090425/ap_on_re_la_a...
The courts have decided. Some bought by gold. Others by pressured from above. Since when they have
jailed a criminal U.S. soldier? The U.S. will always find ways to absolved erring military soldiers. Fly them away
at no ones notice for safety, to frustrate Justice. A nation who commits its ideals: "Justice for All". Is now doing
its own Injustice. Because the other nation is weak and can be bought by U.S. Visa and can be subject to U.S.
pressure.
If US government intervened on Smith's case to release Smith, then why would they send Smith to US Military Court Justice or Court Marshall for trial?
…and to let you know, Court Marshall is NOT a joke!
Stop the BLAME GAME!
court idealists and court haters do not get the whole scenario of this celebrated case. mr. smith lost this case and it was nicole who win bigtime.
it was a simple case of brusque manner by which nicole was handled after a night sex with smith that catapulted this whole event into a bigtime "rape case". our deep-seated bias against americans who "violated" our women added to this furor. our machismo image is consistent with our concept that it was only we who have the right to violate our own women.
all these brouhaha turned out good for nicole. she was able to get a conviction from the RTC and that gave here extra leverage to maneuver for settlement.
(please continue reading, system won't allow one long continous post)
i had been in this road before and nicole's flight to the U.S. after the appeal was the handiwork of "backdoor operators" who convinced her to fire her lawyer, issue a recantation, and go to U.S. these "backdoor operators" have access to the CA and CA could have informed these operators that on the basis of the records, it can reverse the decision but won't do it under the atmosphere the case has generated and considering further that recently some of its "distinguished members" have been axed for corruptions.
so the "recantation" angle was meant to address two points: the perception of the public that smith was guilty and the preconceived perception that the CA is a corrupt institution. that the case was raffled to three (3) manangs was another move to address the emotion and passion of those who would not feel comfortable with the decision.
i'm curious about these backdoor operators.
who are these people? how do they work? are they political (agents of politicians)? or are they their own agents?
how do you know this is true?
people,
sometimes it has nothing to do with the law at all. where a case has transfixed the entire nation, our institution has to make an odius fix. CA can always render a decision of acquittal of Smith, but it has been affected by the "lynch-mob" syndrome that it has to do some extra legal work to frame its acquittal on that ground work: "affidavit of recantation" and Nicole's flight to U.S. and three lady justices delivering the reversal. Cute, neh?
I agree with this JCC, it has indeed transfixed the entire nation. But sometimes, the majority's need for justice to be served when it feels strongly that indeed a crime has been committed cannot be overlooked.
I struggle with both sides of the debate on this one… on one hand, there's Dean that pushes and challenges us to adhere to the decision of the court… and on the other hand theres ManuelB who also challenges us to fight against any perceived injustice and to call a spade a spade, especially when a ruling such as what was delivered seems to interpret rape in their own world view… and to further the debate on the current ruling, that of Ricky Carandang, in his most insightful look at the word "No"..
I submit, that such views and opinions are needed, because indeed, there are multitudes of Filipinos that share the views of both Dean, ManuelB, and Ricky, as well as others in this blog. to throw aside any of the views as being that of a lynch mob is to deny the right of many out there who have made this ideological viewpoint their own, irrespective of any lynch mob that may have been created during this highly publicized case.
The nation transfixed depends on how transfixed the pekeng-peryodistas are. If pekeng-peryodistas are transfixed it does not follow majority of filipino people are transfixed in the absence of poll …
This is where the arrogance of dumb pekeng-peryodistas comes in … they think what they think is the thinking of the majority …
good point Renato..
I am just curious, Nick, is the 'line' here at FV now peddling the lie that those in MSM are simplistically either "fake journalists" or "lynch mob members"?
Have we descended to just name-calling in utter disregard for civility, honest assessment of reason, and the body of work of individuals whose strivings and integrity none of us are in any position to judge??
If this will become the order of the day some will begin looking for the exit.
Further, does anyone here have a sense of the era where being tagged as a communist led to people being ostracized or worse???
Hi Ding, no of course not, I was pointing out the point made by Renato that there may have been a case of a nation transfixed by this situation, but also transfixed because of the media mileage that was given due to this case..
I don't condone such name calling, and of course, we should always strive for civility in our disagreements.. or in Renato's case, a clear focus on an ad hominem against his seeming crusade against "pekeng peryodistas"… I disagree with this tactic, because I fervently believe that there are a great number of journalists that lend a great contribution to society in the form of excellent investigative journalism and reporting of stories that only MSM as of the present time have the resources to cover..
So, we are in agreement of course that civility and respect should be upheld, even as there are those who hold an extreme view against MSM..
If they say "the people are fixated" support it with equally dumb stats from SWS … If pekeng-peryodistas cannot even do simple coverage and open can of worms by Failon househelps … how could they inttelligently form "the people are fixated on Nicole V Smith"?
If this was American Jury the pekeng-peryodistas will end in Pelican Bay
It's like saying, Ding, that since pekeng-peeryodistas are not covering their stupid idiotic reporting that means that they are making good reporting? ….
The pekeng-peryoddistas are dumbing Pilifinos to the hilt!!!!
I agree with DJB entirely on this – even in court, with "evidence" provided – it is ultimately a decision that is formulated in the mind of the trial judge as to a verdict "beyond doubt" – a matter of perception while in close proximity to the beating heart of the case.
How can anyone further removed reach any worthwhile conclusion, when it is task enough inside the courtroom?
Surely there must be a time to sit on hands, hold tongues & leave this sensitive decision entirely free from any influence whatsoever – which is why I feel it was such a travesty – that once it had entered the public realm in such scant and arbitrary detail – an already threadbare impartiality became immediately and opportunistically torn completely assunder – and the people's consciences let it happen.
Landslide mentality – a landscape without the individually deep ethical roots to prevent it from happening.
"And they are shameless — utterly shameless."
I dunno DJB. Have you suddenly become clueless?
These groups (Gabriela, Bayan, Anak Pawis, etc.) must do what they are expected to do i.e. play their role and mandate. People elected their party lists expecting them to give the left-of-center position and not countenance the center. Alangan naman Gabriela would support Smith.
Call them the lynch mob or whatever. They are still on cue and script. Wake up to the realities, man.
Here's a little UK news quote from January this year – "Thirteen of Britain's main charities, who together constitute the Disasters Emergency Committee, have asked broadcasters to air an appeal during primetime on Monday seeking donations for Palestinians affected by the conflict.
But the BBC and Sky, which have 24-hour news channels watched in the Middle East and have closely followed Israel's three-week war in which 1,300 Palestinians were killed, say they will not air the appeal for fear of being seen to take sides.
"Our commitment as journalists is to cover all sides of that story with uncompromising objectivity," John Ryley, the head of Sky News, said in a statement on Monday.
"That is why, after very careful consideration, we have concluded that broadcasting an appeal for Gaza at this time is incompatible with our role in providing balanced and objective reporting of this continuing situation to our audiences."
Now – in no way am I suggesting that the UK news is normally without bias and spin – but to me this indicates the path that should be adopted – by media, politicians alike – in sensitive cases – by not adding any fuel to a potential conflagration.
stfu n00b.
Hi Jepoy – are you thinking of taking up journalism – may I humbly suggest that you offer readers a little more to get their teeth into.
yeah yeah whatever, stfu n00b.
<img src="http://www.ratemyeverything.net/image/5529/0/STFU_and_GTFO.ashx" width="400" height="350">
What has the US Military tribunal n store for them? Nothing! Nicole recanted. Nicole claimed she was not raped after all! There is no case … aside … it's part of US Military Justice system to retry when they land in US soil. It's actually a debriefing sort of.
What Americans learn from this experience is that Filipinos cannot be trusted. They cannot even make a passable invistigation on Failon how much more on Cpl Smith.
Guys, open your eyes thru Manilas polluted air …
By the way, HAS ANYONE SUED THE IDIOTS PEKENG-PERYODISTAS FOR VIOLATING THE RIGHTS OF NICOLE? NO ONE! NOT ONEE! ZERO! ZILCH! NADA! NYET! CONYO PILIFINOS … WE CAN NEVER LEARN ….
Finally!
This case should NOT even go to trial in the first place.
The Regional Trial Court who convicted Smith in 2006, Judge Pozon, was PRESSURED by media and anti-Americans to give the guilty verdict on smith eventhough all the facts presented to court did NOT show any rape at all.
No Blood Alcohol Content or BAC was even done on Suzette to see how much alcohol she had in her body.
There is NO jury duty in the Philippines.
Only the Judge decides on the case in the lower or Regional Trial Court.
There is Jury of Justices in the Court of Appeals there and they were the ones who acquitted Smith.
Suzette and Smith were BOTH used by the leftists in the Philippines (Gabriela, Bayan Muna, lawyer Ursua, politicians Hontiveros, Madridal, Legarda, etc.) for their POLITICAL and career aspirations.
They did NOT really care about either of them but they saw an OPPORTUNITY and Smith was USED as an effigy of the US.
Suzette has been wanting to come to the US since she was a kid… just like almost everybody in the Philippines so she made up her story.
Why are people so agog over US Military Tribunal? JAG don't work the way Philippine justice works. If Nicole says she was not rape there is no case.
In the Pilifinas, even though Nicole issued an affidavit that she was not raped, SHE WAS STILL RAPED …. sheeesh …
That is why Amerikanos yanked Cpl Smith from our stupid form of justice system.
By the way DJB,
Smith will be subject to US Military Court Marshall not because of what you speculate – causing so much trouble between old allies and giving the Lynch Mob such a golden opportunity for propaganda.
It is because he did not treat Suzette right after having sex with her by dumping her on the curbside. In other words, MISCONDUCT.
If the US Government intervened that's why Smith was acquitted like what Anti-Americans are saying, then why would the US subject him to Court Marshall?
Think about it… and Court Marshall is NOT a joke.
Court Marshall is moro-moro, part of the process of military men who were charged abroad but not convicted. I surmise the reason is for the military to form cultural opinion of Filipinos so the next time they come here they'll be debriefed based on Cpl Smith experience.
Does annyone know the percentage of acquitals of US military men who were charged abroad?
I think Meeh said it all. The first time he reads the case, he was convinced that there was no rape and the case simply went to trial because of the pressure from certain sectors of the society. I tend to agree with his view but I do not claim this to be the unvarnished truth.
But I am past that issue now. I joined DJB in his steadfast and unswerving position that accused Smith is entitled to be presumed innocent until the appellate court has affirmed the conviction. Absence of affirmance, it would be too presumptuous to claim that Smith was a convicted rapist and to gloat over the trial court’s decision as a “triumph of justice”. We put the cart before the horse, so to speak.
(please continue reading)
Having described the trial court’s decision as a “triumph of justice”, we have closed our minds to a contrary ruling of the appellate court and have compromised our sanity in the process. Not that this appeal court is too immaculate, but even at times that it tries to render justice for justice sake, our intolerant belief that Mr. Smith has already been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt by the trial court, makes it impossible for us to process the “not guilty verdict”.
(please continue)
It was Mr. Buencamino and his retinue of “closed-minded people” that made this entire debate unhealthy. Add to this unhealthy debate the honest perception of the public that justice in the country can be bought.
The public knew only what the CA has written as its verdict but it has no direct access to the transcript of testimonies of Ms. Nicole and Mr. Smith, nor were the public present during the entire proceedings of the case.
The debate as to whether Ms. Nicole really has agreed to have sex with Mr. Smith or she has conveyed effectively to her partner her unequivocal refusal to have sex with him, or that she was entirely drunk when she had sex with Mr. Smith therefore the sex was non-consensual are all matters of speculations. A court intending to convict Mr. Smith (as in the case of Judge Pozon) would selectively highlight those portions that tend to interpret the existence of force or non-consensual sex, but the appellate court intending to deliver a not guilty verdict would highlight Ms. Nicole’s early romantic liaison with Mr. Smith as precursor of more intimate sex.
(more please)
The public, (Mr. Buencamino, DBJ, Meeh, Ricky Carandang and JCC included) cannot fully determine whether there was rape or not unless we are made privy to the evidence and had observed the demeanor of the witnesses in court. Any debate to determine this particular truth, from my standpoint is entirely fruitless.
I hope people mark this particular comment of yours JCC. For it is an essential truth about our society and justice system. Which is why the discussion over "presumption of innocence" cannot be undervalued and what difference of opinion and understanding we have about that matter ought to be threshed out by each individual blogger for himself. You see, that is how we come to terms with this painful truth of yours. We are delegating to the Courts the task of determining for us how we really ought to think of the "truth" of a particular human situation like the Subic rape case.
It was very important for us to understand that Pozon's decision was an expression of HIS finding of moral certainty in his own mind of the guilt of the accused. But to grant to this decision some kind of objective truth, is to demean the appeals process as merely some kind of review of what Pozon saw, should have seen, or not seen, or decided. I have come to much greater appreciation of the design of the Justice System through this particular interpretation of criminal prosecution as analogous to the passage of a law through the bicameral legislature, except that we have a tricameral or three stage Court System. They are different in the sense that the criminal prosecution proceeds in series, whereas Congress works in parallel. But this way of looking at it is useful to me as a way of guiding my ethics and behavior as journalist and blogger.
It was most unfair and unethical for example that Daniel Smith's personal circumstances were not protected as privacy of Nicole was. Indeed it was illegal under RA8505. Even after RTC conviction, it was unethical to deny him those quintessential due process rights.
And so thank you for pointing out what should be an obvious fact: that we, the public, and the bloggers, are in no position to determine the ultimate truth about this case. But I assert that we ARE responsible for unethical behavior on our own accounts, when we write and declaim publicly about these cases.
I say again: it was illegal to divulge the identities of both accuser and accused under RA 8505. It was surely unethical as well for journalists and bloggers to pile on once Ursua and the authorities had done so.
Ricky Carandang has the CA decision, which tells us exactly the reasons why the orig decision was reversed. lets wait for it, although, i doubt anything else will resurface
Atty. jcc,
The horse being dead, here'sa my updated, and final take on this issue:
http://midfield.wordpress.com/2009/04/25/good-rid...
The Horse may be dead. But the Lynch Mob will rise to ride again. When it does, there shall I be to beat their pointy-headed hoods made of pillow cases full of goose feathers.
… and in the Pilifinas, affidavit is easy to get … got beef aganst your neighbor? Issue apidavit ! Got miffed by your counselor? Issue apidafit!
Paid? Issue apidafit that the apidafit that was issued is not what he/she wanted to issue … HA!HA!HA! GET REAL FOLKS … YOU ARE ALL IN AMERICA … PILIFINAS WORKS DIFFERENTLY …. HA!HA!HA!
COME BACK TO PILIFINAS ANDD EXPERIENCE INJJUSTICE !!!! HA!HZ!HA!HA!
Unfortunately even if some people say our legal system worked, our penal system didn't. Smith had the creature comforts of the US embassy while awaiting appeal.
Penal System? But I thought the newspaper said he was not guilty?
Again you split hairs like a lawyer but you aren't one. I The operation of our jails and penal facilities is under the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology. Smith had to be detained after conviction Now why should an American citizen be detained in the US Embassy (which isn't Philippine territory)? while awaiting appeal for a crime committed in the Philippines? A Filipino citizen who commits a crime in American territory is detained in an American facility until the appeals process has run its course. Now tell me is this right?
Why? Because the VFA says that the two parties shall agree on the place of detention "untill all judicial proceedings are complete."
The eventual acquittal makes plain why this is was a wise agreement. If you were the not guilty Daniel Smith you would agree with this arrangement.
As for the special treatment, the reason is he is NOT a Philippine citizen, yet jurisdiction was ceded to the Philippines, even if custody was not. He is more like a diplomat, who are also governed by different rules in society when they are involved in crimes.
At least the US did not insist on diplomatic immunity.
I am not splitting hairs by saying that the penal system is not applicable until a person is convicted and put in prison for it.
That is why we do not now refer to Daniel Smith as an "ex-con" — not even the Lynch Mob.
Here's what I can contribute, our legal system, though close to perfect, and idiotic penal system, and corrupt enforcers of law our system still has uniformity and high probability of predictability as compared to GOD SYSTEM …
I protested before the church asking for responnse of my prayers and people said I was crazy. How could I be fakking crazy when these very people who said I was crazy believe that God is true. If it's true, therefore, I must not be crazy … The people who's telling me I'm crazy must be the ones crazy …
Pipol in America protest before the archdiocese of Boston. They were not crazy. But if these Flips are given a Visa to America, they''d rather be with loonies than stay with sane pipol in my dear FlipLand …
To understand Flips is to understand chaos theory …
Guys, Di pa ba kayo paos at tapos? :)
Both Nicole and Daniel, the ex-loxers, have bid us GOOD RIDDANCE.
Tayo ba hindi pa?
Go to your nearest Starbucks, ang usapan ngayon: Get raped, will travel, and even get a student visa for your brother as added bonus.
Atty. Jose Flaminiano was himself flustered to learn his clients had flown the coop, legally without not even a goodbye text message.
So now Flaminiano and Ursua will begin dating and prolly collaborate on a book about how to harmonize the American jury system and the Philippines' Third World RTC-CA-SCORP corruption-imbued judicial-kuno structure.
Kapag magkakatuluyan sila and true love blossoms, the reception will be at Neptune Club at Subic, with courtesy Sling cocktails.
Ninong sa kasal sina Usec Marius Corpus at Ka Satur and ninongs,at sina GMA At Amba Kristie Kenney ang ninangs, with the CA Mananang as bridesmaids.
O di ang saya-saya :)
Ding, they are just licking their wounds … they cannot accept the fact that they've been had ….
Nicole is waiting for Cpl Smith in her warm arms and wet in-betweens … HA!HA!HA!HA! I HOPE NICOLE POSTS THEIR WEDDING PICTURE IN BLOGS AND SEND PLENTY TO ALL PEKENG-PERYODIKOS INCLUDING GABRIELA …. HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!
BTW DJB, a lynching is defined as an extrajudicial punishment meted by a mob. There is no lynch mob in the Smith case since who you call a "lynch mob" did their stuff as allowed by Philippine law. Gabriela and company are well within their rights.
Now if you call inconveniencing people passing in front of Bayview Hotel a criminal offense, then Gabriela and company may be considered a lynch mob especially if they mete a penalty to any American citizen on Roxas Blvd. I stepped out of the American Embassy with two American colleagues, cross over to Bayview to loud protests but never did the protesters do anything to harm the Americans.
Your attitude reflects what a Southern senator once said after the Civil War and I paraphrase
"We never have recognized the right of the Filipino to mete a penalty on an American and we never will. We have never believed that the Filipino is equal to the American"
You have dual nationality. This time, twist your head towards the Filipino one.
I am a human being first and foremost. My nationalities are secondary to that. And that of course is the mistake of the Lynch Mob: racial and national prejudice. If you think only Americans are capable of racism and bigotry, well think again.
people should not be too tight-shirted and should refrain from dishing out ad hominems. while we claim that we are a a notch better than the MSM, our behavior in this blog appears contrary to that claim.
"lynch-mob" is descriptive of the group of people who went to the street after the Smith acquittal and those bloggers who still insist that Mr. Smith should have been detained at the decrepit Makati Jail or the Bilibid at Muntinlupa while awating decision from CA.
The Filipinio People should have apologized for Smith and for all others who have been detained and declared not guilty afterwards. Our system is not fool-proof and we must have the grace and the dignity to accept our shortcomings.
(more, please continue reading)
JCC, we are way a thousand notches above MSM. This blogsite has RIGHTS-TO-REPLY implemented whereas the pekeng-peryodistas has totally none of it!
If Mr. Blackshama is accused of rape, detained at the Makati Jail, pilloried in the press as a rapist, and then transferred to his home for incarceration while being tried in the appellate court, and then acquitted, he would not be thankful for being allowed to stay home while the appeal process was being litigated. He would certainly be upset and kicking the ground mightily and swearing at the press and the bloggers that pilloried him and would demand an apology and compensation from the government.
Incidentally, there is a Republic Act which provides compensation for people who languished in jail and declared acquitted afterwards.
to DJB: your constant plaint that people should be silent even after a person has been convicted by a lower court is nonsense. Just think about it. How do you protect the population from lawyers convicted of estafa or extortion or priests convicted of pedophilia or university- or high-school faculty convicted of rape if "freedom of information" is stifled/
Who's talking about "silent"? I am only talking about what is ethical and right. It was illegal under RA8505 to divulge Daniel Smith's name from the very beginning. Most people still do not KNOW this, to this day, on this thread. They think it is just my opinion. They are wrong. It was illegal and unethical, and yet there are screwheads who love to use the word "rapist" stumbling all over themselves to find the right adjective now that the word they have been using has been made foolish and self-deprecating. They are graduates of prestigious universities who seem to believe their diploma grants them a license to stop thinking, studying and learning.
Yep it was illegal and the mighty ignorant pekeng-peryodista got away with it. ANND NOBODY SCREAMED AND HEWED … HA!HA!HA! WE'RE DOOOMED!!!!!
Who'd want to take on the pekeng-peryodista? NO ONE BUT US!
Even the rights-to-reply bill is now in the back burner because 2010 is approaching and the lawmakers don't want to lock horns with idiot pekeng-peryodistas!!!!! HA!HA!HA!
the continuation of my post was nowhere to be found so i am reposting it:
If Mr.Blackshama is accused of rape and pending trial has been pillored by the press as a rapist and was put behind bars at the decrepit and crowded Makati Jail, and after conviction by the trial court, more vitriolic was hurled against him but pending appeal, he was granted the right to be incarcerated in the comforts of his home. After acquittal by the CA you cannot expect Blackshama to say thank you for being allowed to be detained at his home. He would for all indications, kicking his foot hard on the ground with indignation and would unleash the most vituperative remarks against the press and the court.
One's plight is better understood if we put ourselves in his own shoes
We have heard nothing from Mr. Smith. And we did not say sorry for our own shortcomings.
DJB,
Don’t you just find it extremely frustrating to find people you expect imbued with some sense of intelligence but could hardly understand the meaning of due process of law and the constitutional presumption of innocence? And yet we easily complain that majority of our people are unwashed and illiterate and entirely clueless that we are one of them?
Right on JCC … we wanted due process of law but convicted GMA already in our mind … GMA is not presumed innocence … as to sense of intelligence … pekeng-peryoistas and brainwashed Flips would rather hang GMA than hang the foreign-educated-ivy-graduate Senate gung-gong who bungled the invistigation to acquit GMA by subtle means … HA!HA!HA!HA! fllllllipppppps kaylan kayo magiging learned?
If they have had attacked and critique the invistigation-in-aid-of-legislation-to-acquit-GMA-by-bungling the process we'd have hit two birds with one stone ….. The idiot Senate inbistigadores and GMA ..
NOW LET'S LIVE WITH IT …. HA!HA!HA!HA!
Military Trial for Smith may just be a Consuelo de Bobo, for us. It is a prelude to getting out of the Military.
Smith may be honorably or dishonorably discharged. But, that is Kid Glove, compared to 40 years sentence
in a Philippine Jail.
I only have two words on this issue: good riddance.
Not so fast Ding! You seem to want to sweep under the rug certain things of grave importance here, such as the ethics and morals of blogging about criminal cases. It is most convenient NOW to insist that this is just about "Nicole and Daniel" –which formula by the way proves my very point all in that 3-word phrase you used. You see, it shows the violation of RA8505 and of the Code of Journalistic Ethics right in the simple fact that you mention Daniel's real name but cling to the fiction of "Nicole"!
Ditto, Manong.
You forget that long ago i have tagged 'Nicole' as SUZETTE SOMBILON NICOLAS in real life as soon as her name surfaced in the public record.
That Daniel Smith's name was revealed early on, as is the case with other respondents in other cases.
It may be relevant to tell you here that this writer is also strongly supporting the crusade of former labor USec Toots Ople in unmasking the foreigners victimizing Fiiinas in Malaysia ang Singapore just as I am in unity with Filipino journalists in Dubai in going after that POEA-licensed agency which bamboozled 137 Filipinos bus drivers.
So there.
BTW, I am actually in agreement with your last missive to jcc.
For the record, however, will you confirm my recollection that some time back in our own settled exchange on the Subic case that in your own solo assessment you believe that rape did take place?
However else, I have, on the record, bid good riddance to both D & S. :)
When are we doing lunch?
HAS ANY PEKENG-PERYODISTAS CHARGED BY VIOLATING THE PRIVACY RIGHTS OF NICOLE???? HA!HA!HA!
From Justice department to the department of pekeng-peryodistas to everyone here in the FlipLand …. are soooo idiotic that we need to APPLY FOR WRIT OF AMPARING FOR OUR RIGHTS TO BE PROTECTED!!! HA!HA!HA!HA!
And you people are ripping apart, nitpicking and debating esoteric rule-of-laws …. when even our basicest of "do not throw your trash here" is even violated …. and most of all the pekeng-peryodistas got away for violating the privacy rights of Nicole …..
jcc, your "we claim that we are a a notch better than the MSM…"
Hindi po. We can only be as good as our last sober and sane exchanges.
The crazy rants and wholesale name-calling at the expense of MSM erode any supposed ascendancy.
Can we step back in time a bit on this case since the dead horse is being beaten still?
http://midfield.wordpress.com/2009/03/17/nicole-i...
The criminal case is a dead horse yes, but the unethical and crass behavior that continues is a living pox on our self-respect. The lynch mob is turning into a herd of swine. Just listen to Ursua and Gabriela and Manuel Buencamino. Have we not respect for the Law whatsoever around here? Or reason and civilized behavior?
And by the way, is ir just me, or is the referemce here to Smith facing a possible Court Martial a pa-'consuelo de bobo' for the group being referred to quite derisively, even condescendingly, as a lynch mob???
Foul.
People who feel referred to by the term "lynch mob" ought to feel referred to, for it is intentional and sober a label as I could find. At least a figure of speech it does capture the flavour of the anti-VFA, anti-American mob that set upon the case as a battering ram for an old agenda. They deserve derision and deconstruction by all sane and reasonable human beings.
Manong Dean,
This writer is anti-VFA in the degree that puts the Philippines on a lesser plane of equality to its vaunted ally.
Does it make me anti-American? I think not.
Am I insane because I feel aggrieved?
Am I unreasonable?
You tell me. I am at your service. :)
dingg458,
Due to Smith dumping of Suzette on the curbside after having sex with her, that is MISCONDUCT and it is SOP for the US Military to investigate that (more trial for Smith).
The other marines who were with Smith at the time were subjected to Court Martial and have been discharged already. The most senior among the group was dishonorably discharged – Chain of Command responsibility.
Think about it… and Court Martial is NOT a joke.
"… dumping of Suzette on the curbside after having sex with her, that is MISCONDUCT."
The act of "dumping on the curbside"?
Now it's clearer, than mud. :)
So after gangraping the Filipina they should have escorted her home to absolve them of the misconduct?
Maginoo pero medyo bastos, as the hit song goes.
ding,
Suzette INITIALLY said that she was gang-raped. She then changed her story later on and said that only Smith raped her.
Based on the evidence presented to court, Smith did NOT rape Suzette… The evidence ALL pointed to CONSENSUAL sex that's why the three women justices of the Court of Appeals who were handling this case acquitted Smith.
Judge Pozon was PRESSURED by Gabriela, Ursua, Hontiveros, the media, etc., to convict Smith of rape in 2006 eventhough all the facts presented pointed to consensual sex.
Both Smith and Suzette were USED here by the OPPORTUNISTS.
Read the acquittal draft of the original Court of Appeals Justice who was handling this case headed by Justice Dizon, before he retired in June 2008 that was posted in Manila Times a month ago.
Justice Dizon said that the prosecutors filed that Daniel Smith “forced and intimidated” Suzette while the evidence that they presented in court was "intoxication".
According to the draft, that was also the issue because the "force and intimidation" that the prosecutors filed against Smith was NOT presented in court during the trial and that Smith wasn't aware of it and that it was his right to be informed of what he was being tried on.
I'm sure that issue is also in the Court of Appeals 71-page acquittal of Smith by Associate Justice Arevalo-Zenarosa, Fernando and Vidal but since the full document of the acquittal is not posted online yet, we haven't read it yet.
Am also waiting for the decision to become available online although Manong DJB appears to have "read" it. :)
I will even concede that assrtion that no gang rape took place.
So Daniel is the sole maginoo pero medyo bastos for "dumping" his date on the curbside.
This is "misconduct"? His only offense then?
This case is a POLITICAL PAWN – no more, no less.
…and UCMJ knows that.
And has anyone even read the decision, for real?
jcc,
I am actually counting on people's natural "amor propio". As bloggers no one wants to be proven "wrong" on some large and long lasting issue like the Subic Rape Case.
I think that the attitude proper to a respect for the Presumption of Innocence also protects the Public against undue personal vexation over the sometimes unpredictable outcome of a criminal prosecution. In part this is because of the impt point you have made earlier in the thread, that the Public cannot possibly have enough of the data (evidence and testimony) to attempt the judgment of guilt beyond reasonable doub that is required in such cases. Of course this level of trust in the Justice system must be established over time by consistently just and fair decisions that stand the test of time.
DJB,
spot on DJB. That's the reason why the CA has to do some desperate extra legal acts just to convince the public that the decision was above-board because it has not been able to established its credibility over time.
Will someone raise their hands if Presumption of Innocencese and rule-of-law can be applied to GMA, too?
Renato,
Yes of course it applies to every criminally accused person. If and when GMA is charged with a crime, the Presumption of Innocence would apply to her in equal measure.
Do you have problem with that?
I have no problem with that. I agree with you. If only pekeng-peryodistas attacked the invistigative process of foreign-educated-ivy-school-graduate ding-aling-ding-dong bungling Senators, we would have changed the Senate and eject GMA.
Idiot commentaristas would rather eject GMA and us still saddled with idiot Senators.
I'm glad someone is writing about the law. Philippine Laws I think are on par with developed democracies. The application is subjective due to ignorance. Sad thing is that those who are supposed to be more knowledgeable, like lawyers, media, or people in position are the worst offenders.