I haven’t read the 71 page decision acquitting Smith because it has not yet been published in any newspaper or blog that I know of. However from excerpts that were published I’m inclined to believe that the decision was penned by three “manangs.”
- “Her going to Subic from far away Zamboanga with her stepsister, (with) two American friends whom they met only about three months earlier and accepting their offer of free hotel accommodations and other things as well—in her words, “to enjoy”—do not coincide with the demure provinciana lass we are talking about,” HOW IS A DEMURE PROVINCIANA LASS SUPPOSED TO BEHAVE?
-
“On hindsight, we see this protestation of decency as a protective shield against her own indecorous behavior,” INDECOROUS BEHAVIOR, WHAT IS DECOROUS BEHAVIOR?
-
“When a woman is drunk, she can hardly rise, much more stand up and dance, or she would just drop. This is a common experience among Filipino girls,” A COMMON EXPERIENCE AMONG FILIPINO GIRLS?
-
“The curious thing is that she danced non-stop to the urgent beat of rock and hip-hop music in an inebriated state for 15 minutes without stumbling clumsily on the floor.This gap in her narration with the malingering explanation that she was dizzy and could not remember is dubiously fanciful for being what the court perceptively describes as contrary to ordinary experience of man,” IT’S CURIOUS THAT THE GIRL COULD STILL DANCE WITHOUT FALLING ON HER FACE?
-
“Suddenly the moment of parting came and the Marines had to rush to the ship. In that situation, reality dawned on Nicole—what her audacity and reckless abandon, flirting with Smith and leading him on, brought upon her. HER AUDACITY AND RECKLESS ABANDON, FLIRTING WITH SMITH AND LEADING HIM ON, BROUGHT UPON HER. SHE ASKED FOR IT?
Dear Manangs,
Girls just wanna have fun without getting raped.
Girls Just Wanna Have Fun – Cyndi Lauper
I come home in the morning light,
My mother says “When you gonna live your life right?”
Oh,mother,dear,
We’re not the fortunate ones,
And girls,
They wanna have fu-un.
Oh,girls,
Just wanna have fun.The phone rings in the middle of the night,
My father yells “What you gonna do with your life?”
Oh,daddy,dear,
You know you’re still number one,
But girls,
They wanna have fu-un,
Oh,girls,just wanna have
That’s all they really want…..
Some fun….When the working day is done,
Oh,girls,
They wanna have fu-un,
Oh,girls,
Just wanna have fun….Girls,
They want,
Wanna have fun.
Girls,
Wanna haveSome boys take a beautiful girl,
And hide her away from the rest of the world.
I wanna be the one to walk in the sun.
Oh,girls,
They wanna have fu-un.
Oh,girls,
Just wanna have
That’s all they really want…..
Some fun….When the working day is done,
Oh,girls,
They wanna have fu-un.
Oh,girls,
Just wanna have fun…Girls,
They want,
Wanna have fun.
Girls,
Wanna have.They just wanna,
They just wanna…..
They just wanna,
(Oh….)
They just wanna…..
(Girls just wanna have fun…)
Oh…Girls just wanna have fu-un…
They just wanna,
They just wanna….
They just wanna,
They just wanna….
(Oh…)
They just wanna…
(They just wanna have fun…)
Girls just wanna have fu-un…When the workin’,
When the working day is done.
Oh,when the working day is done,
Oh,girls…
Girls,
Just wanna have fu-un…They just wanna,
They just wanna….
They just wanna,
They just wanna have fun…Girls just wanna have fu-un..
They just wanna,
They just wanna….
They just wanna,
They just wanna….
(Have fun..)They just wanna,
(Girls wanna have fun)
They just wanna….
Oh,girls…
(Wanna have fun….)
Girls just wanna have fu-un.When the workin’,
When the working day is done.
Oh,when the working day is done,
Oh,girls,
Girls just wanna have fu-un.They just wanna,
They just wanna….
(Oh,girls…)
They just wanna,
(Have fun….)
Oh,girls..
Girls just wanna have fu-unThey just wanna,
They just wanna…
When the working day is done…
(fades)
Popularity: 1% [?]
It is already scandalous that what has always essentially been a truth – secretly shared by only two people, disguised by one of them – has been exposed to such a travesty of uninformed and parasitically distorted public debate.
Leeches – sucking the blood to feed their contempt.
A contempt so heated that it can vaporise a critical component of law – the presumption of innocence – and a most valuable component of civilisation – the presumption of impartiality.
A contempt that was hiding behind the skirt of lady justice but is now revealed in its full ugliness – as the lady herself steps away.
What we have seen can only replace those components – with a presumption of presumption – fed by ill-informed gossip and viral rumour – such a presumption can only reflect a total lack of trust in the judicial system, by all those who consider themselves worthy of making pre-emptive judgement for themselves – resulting not in it gaining authority and strength, but being perceived as weak and incompetent.
Its own built in securities have been abused, its own tenets ignored – and very few people have had the courage or vision to step back from the feeding-frenzied crowd and plead for impartiality – implore obedience to the security of rights for the two human beings central to the whole episode.
In short – it has been a circus – and if this portal is a glimpse into the general behaviour of a country – then that country needs to tuck its head back into its heart.
stfu n00b,
Thank you Jepoy – for perfectly illustrating that contempt – what would we do without you?
seriously, i don't know why Nick is still allowing you to post your nonsense here at Filipino Voices. You're worse than Chip Tsao.
C'mon Nick, ban the bastard. I can't believe you're allowing a man who literally abused a Filipina here.
Jepoy – I have already asked you, on this very forum, to provide one single speck of evidence to support your version of events – and you failed to do so.
I cannot see why you would hesitate, if indeed you were in possession of such evidence – therefore your attitude can only be motivated by contempt, wishful thinking – or worse – if you are deliberately trying to thwart the course of truth.
Your behaviour is so pertinent to the content of this thread – you are demonstrating the mind set of blind contempt so graphically – well done.
well, stfu n00b.
are you saying MB that men should never have sex with drunk women, because, they could always say it was rape (and be right)?
so the man's testimony that it was consensual NEVER matters?
rape is fundamentally a he said/she said crime. how should we know who to believe?
Good point. The man's testimony almost NEVER matters. It's always the woman whom we're supposed to believe. I think this is just a further continuation of the emasculation of the male species. :-D
But just so we're clear, rape is WRONG.
When I was an undergrad attending the Practical Law course at Malcolm Hall, I clearly remember Justice Flerida Ruth Romero tell us that if a woman is unable to give consent, then it is rape. So moral of the story was, don't fool around with the drunk!
Gabby, I think what Manuel is trying to convey is that what is being penned as a decision by The CA will have a great effect on future rape cases.. such that, these words should have been penned more carefully..
interesting.
thought experiment: lets say we can write our own decision, but the decision ultimately sets smith go.
what words would be more acceptable? how can we write it such that we don't come across as 'manangs'?
my prediction:
it is impossible to rule in favor of smith WITHOUT at the same time, ruling in favor of nicole's (original version).
either we think its rape, or we don't.
either we think its consensual or we don't.
the question is: how do we know which is which?
generically, we should have a theory of behavior. in general there are two, which can loosely be described as a theory that calls what happened (ie considering all the evidence) rape, VS a theory that calls what happened consensual.
i'm curious to know how the law (or even individuals) come down on either side.
specifically, i'm interested in drunkeness… it sex with a drunk person immediately rape?
leytenian thinks so. i think MB thinks so too.
as a man, personally, i wish all my sexual encounters are meaningful and without too much alcohol. but i can't rule that out. so, as a man, should i be afraid to have sex with a drunk woman?
typo:
i meant to say:
my prediction:
it is impossible to rule in favor of smith WHILE at the same time, ruling in favor of nicole's (original version).
GabbyD: are you asking ManuB, or are you asking Ding or jcc34, to give you advice on sex with an inebriated woman?
But here are 2 lessons for you to always be aware of:
Number 1 : protection.
Number 2: if you think the woman will loudly complain within 3 days or 3 weeks, then "DON'T".
You can be in jail for 3 months or 3 years or 30 years before you are found "NOT GUILTY".
hahaha… knowing one's rights is important, but no, i'm not planning on having sex with a drunk woman anytime soon.
at an intellecutal level, i'm also interested in peoples opinions, as well as the legal understanding of the issue.
but from your reply, i guess your position, is that having sex with a drunk woman is potentially dangerous for a man, putting that man in an indefensible position?
gabbyd,
in modern law or even at common law , a man can be held liable or guilty of Rape. the prosecution only has to prove that there was no effective consent from a woman. Now if you are concern about your own liability , please be aware that any one night stand may cause you liability or harm if your woman claimed she was raped regardless if she was drunk or not. This has nothing to do if you are filipino or white. I still believe that Nicole was raped.
Gabby,
There’s also liability for tortious act that may cause emotional distress in civil case. There’s also vicarious liability for the acts of military personnel if wrongful acts were done within it’s own jurisdiction.in this case, the people of this country may demand restitution that such wrongful act ( womens right violation) shoul be compensated.the compensation maybe negotiated behind the scene for political reason.
Give me one court case that was directly influenced by another in the Philippines.
Beer and Tequila Daquiri sales are going to take a hit.
Suzette Sombilhon Nicolas was on the prowl but this is surely not equivalent to the reality that women even in a drunken state can and do get raped. She was.
Otherwise let's indict the Tequiila, Vodka, and beer makers as accessories to countless date rapes.
The three manang's ManuB pokes fun at (or worse) have names, and the names are: The CA decision was written by Associate Justice Monina Arevalo- Zeñarosa (who wrote the decision) and justices Remedios Salazar-Fernando and Myrna Dimaranan-Vidal (of the CA’s special 11th division) who both concurred with the decision. The acquittal basically says there is REASONABLE DOUBT. The acquittal also means that the 3 judges are making its own conclusion about the Nicole-v-Smith case because “… there appears on record that the trial court has overlooked, ignored or disregarded some fact or circumstance of weight or significance that, if considered, would alter the results".
The Manila Times reports on the manang-ness of the 3 justices, as follows:
the three lady magistrates who acquitted Smith were all senior justices with proven integrity.
. . . . .
According to appellate court records, Monina Arevalo-Zeñarosa, 69, has been in the judiciary for 30 years. She started her career as a prosecutor, a position she held for more than 15 years before becoming a Regional Trial Court judge. Zeñarosa was judge for 14 years.
She started in the judiciary as judge in Angeles City in May 1990 and was later designated acting presiding judge, Regional Trial Court Branch 80, Quezon City, from January 16 to March 31, 1992.
Before her appointment to the Court of Appeals on March 9, 2004, Zeñarosa was presiding judge of Branch 76 of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court and was acting presiding judge of the Regional Trial Court Branch 96.
She has received numerous citations and awards, among them, the Most Outstanding Regional Trial Court Judge for 2003 given by the Citizens Anti-Crime Assistance Group and the Award for Judicial Excellence for Rotary Year 1997 to 1998 from Rotary International, District 3780.
There was no mention if any of the judges were bloggers; if any had applied for "green card" to USA or residency-status to Canada or Australia; if any were spinsters/"old maids" / 'never been kissed'.
Thanks for the citation and the credentials of the Lady Justices. Why don't you read them yourself and ask, would you behave like this if you knew these people personally and had some appreciation of their contribution to Women's Liberation and and service to the government and the People?
Do you really know anything at all about these women? Honestly?
DJB and UPngrad,
Pne of the three manangs was admonished by the SC for indecorous behavior related to the GSIS-Meralco bribery controversy
Manuel,
Sanamagan! These "manangs" think very much like the Talibans are concerned..
For all you know, these "manangs" believe that Nicole should be stoned to death too for not behaving like a "provincial lass".
I'd like very much for them to show the world how a Philippine provincial lass should "behave".
Ooops, "…think very much like the Talibans WHERE WOMEN are concerned.. .
Also read somewhere that these manangs believed that it was "romance gone wrong"… WTF!!! So that's how their husbands romance these manangs…HOLY COW!
Manuel,
It's worse! The manangs opined "<span style="font-weight:bold;">'Romantic episode', not rape, says CA</span>
Holy frigging cow! Are these manangs telling us that that's how they experienced romantic episodes in their lives and that's how proviciall lasses should expect romantic episodes in their lives too?
Court of Talibans that's what the CA should be called from now on.
You actually mean that the Philippine Daily Innuendo not the "manangs", Senorita!
I think they're using manang lingo or euphemisms in layman's terms. Although accusing someone of having a romantic episode with animals can get one shot. It's happened before I'm not sure when in my province.
The Lynch Mob rides again! My, my what pretty pointy-headed hoods we have! And of course you have not read the decision and have only been led down this path of attacking the Lady Justices by none other than Evalyn Ursua, who ought to be disbarred for destroying her own clients case with anti-VFA politics. She had not read the decision either MB. Neither have you, yet you have embarked on this juvenile and foolish tack, a kind of argumentum ad feminem, only even more fallacious and scurrilous. This is you being a Male Chauvinist Pig protecting a Proven and Convicted Liar, Ms. Suzette Nicolas y Sombillon.
DJB,
You've got your head so far up Smith's ass it's a surprise it didn't pop our of his dick when he raped Nicole
The basis of the CA's decision was "'Romantic episode', not rape, says CA…
Poor Smith! He's a victim of Philippine vendetta! Poor hapless victim.
Filipinos should be ashamed of themselves for having doubted the innocence, the integrity, the virtues of Smith. Filipinos should bow their heads in shame. They should all say how sorry they are and to pay for their sins, they should build a monument in honour of the victimised US Marines extolling his virtues and by extension the greatness, the fairness, the righteousness of Uncle Sam and his merry Marines.
How dare Filipinos blacken Smith's honour! How dare anyone blacken Smith's name!
You have not read the decision either, like the Opus Dei had not read the Da Vinci Code. Shame on you Anna!
The Filipino people should petition the government of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo so that a Legion of Honour award could be pinned on Smith…
Very funny AdB. It's the back hand you are using now. But it is you own face being slapped.
You're going berserk again Dean! Easy now — your testosterones will dry up at the rate you're going!
Tell me Dean, what's wrong with what I said — if you believe the man's honour and good name had been tarnished by your fellow citizens, isn't it only fair to right the wrong? Unless, of course, you don't believe what you're saying and are just speaking from your backside again.
Anna, unlike most folks I know sarcasm and satire when I see it. Don't act innocent. We've been friend online too long for that.
If you did not know the personal details of the Accused, your attitude and demeanor would be different. That is why RA 8505 upholds the parity of privacy rights between accused and accuser, because we never know how the Court will rule in the end: guilty or not guilty.
After we got a "trial conviction" from Pozon, we saw the Lynch Mob rise to the opportunity of attacking the defense arrangement between the two countries. Now that the accused has been acquitted, at least poor MB has dropped the adjective but insists on the word "rapist".
What a vapid, inglorious and essentially pitiable position the Lynch Mob is in!
In every rape case, the Court is really deciding WHO, between accuser and accused is LYING.
What do you think the Court decided?
MB, punta ka sa Bora, daming na rirape doon.
It is unfair, unjust, unethical to keep calling Daniel Smith a "rapist". Your doing so intentionally demeans this blog and our sense of honor as Filipinos. Have you no shame at all Buencamino?
actually here i lean towards DJB.
is it right to call him a rapist (aquitted or otherwise)?
if the judicial process disagrees with our priors, can we ignore it? is it right to do so?
ACQUITTED RAPIST!!!!!
Daniel Smith was aquited of Rape, because there was a back door court trading to drop the case. A U.S
Green Card Visa for Nicole, in return for recanting her affidavit. She was allowed to flee the country
to end the case. This does not erase the guilt of Rape of the Acquitted Rapist, Daniel Smith.
If you kill a man. And you pay Blood Money to prevent yourself from landing in Jail. You are still a Killer.
Your guilt is still with you. Although, you are not jailed and served the sentence for killing a man.
It is worthy to note, I think, that Smith’s appeal might have gotten the better of the “manangs’” objectivity that they sided with him.
Seriously, Smith’s appeal took quite a lot of “dribbling” and “passing” that ‘the ball” finally ended up with the three female CA Associate Justices. CA Associate justice “manong” Agustin Dizon already had a ponencia prior to his retirement in June last year. His draft ponencia as reported by The Manila Times (TMT)…or shall we say, as leaked to The Manila Times…states the acquittal of Smith on “technicality and substance.” (I’m sure the three female associate justices started from scratch and was not influenced even though they were furnished with the unsigned Dizon’s ponencia.)
In September last year, TMT already reported of a 55-page Dizon draft although the verdict was not disclosed. However, TMT continued that report with a statement from Yuen Abana of the Partido ng Manggagawa, which is part of the Task Force Subic Rape (an organization that kept watch over the controversial rape case):
“We got information that a justice is preparing the decision to reverse Judge Benjamin Pozon’s verdict.”
TMT already hinted last year of the acquittal and they somehow preempted the final decision with their March 23, 2009 disclosure of Dizon’s draft ponencia. The leak from CA probably needs looking into.
Manuel Buencamino,
You are spitting on the gravestone and memory of your great and honorable ancestor, Felipe Buencamino, Sr., who was a framer of the Malolos Constitution, a lawyer and jurist and nationalist.
http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php?title=Felip...
Mark him and shame on you for this scurrilous attack on Lady Justices whose Decision you never bothered to read or understand.
DJB,
The champion of Mananh Morality.
Actually, if you check, not even the MSM dares to call Smith a rapist anymore. just the hard core of the lynch mob at Filipino Voices! Even now that the Philippine Justice system itself has acquitted and released Mr. Daniel Smith, we insist on displaying our fine, fine genius!
Daniel Smith is an Acquited Rapist. He was convicted of Rape. His case was reversed because of
court back door trading done to reverse the case. This CA decision will not erase the guilt of Daniel
Smith.
The title of this post is a true Monument to Victimology. It is emblematic of low self-esteem, individually and collectively. Psychologically, it is a most revealing title. Hatred and prejudice against "old women" and "white men" drips from every syllable. And in the apposite relationship between the verb acquit and the word rapist there is the quintessential rotteness of intellectual dishonesty!
Blog Posters' frenzy is at high level…save the rerthoric, DJB Rizalist.
SideNOTE:
Pay attention to health/influenza news.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090424/ap_on_he_me/m...
(1) Stay away from hospitals.
(2) Buy a box or two of surgical masks, just in case.
Here is just another of those legal myths too conveniently floated around.
Because the judges were women, the line of reasoning goes, the more they would have been more circumspect if not patronizing of the cause of the victimized women, their own. That does not hold water in the reported ponencia prepared in advance by another male judge which may have been the basis.
So indeed, all these legal smokescreen readily shield decisions from further attack.
Smith and Suzette were BOTH used by Gabriela, Pozon, Hontiveros, Madrigal, Ursua, Legarda, etc., for their own POLITICAL and CAREER aspirations.
Smith was USED as an effigy of the US by anti-Americans in the Philippines.
Hay!
Blame game here too!
Grow up people!
ricky carandang has read it, and quotes this passage:
“Resistance by words (sic) of mouth does not suffice to establish that she did not give her consent to the sexual intercourse, but it must be by an act done in good faith and not through a mere pretense or token resistance under the circumstance.”
ricky says: "The judge is not questioning that Nicole said “no”, she is saying that she doubts that Nicole really meant it. "
i agree with ricky's interpretation of that paragraph.
this is a very specific theory of rape. are judges allowed to just come up with their own standard? or does the law have guidelines about the meaning of consent?
fascinating…
here is the link:http://www.rickycarandang.com/?p=224
pinoy mindset. virtue is an honor and one's purity is like one's life, it has to be defended at all cost. when a woman says no to a sex and really means it, she would fight for it, tooth and nail so to speak. … initial no to sex can mean yes later when someone is fired up and aroused by incessant supplication of her partner to have her in bed, in which case there is no rape. this is the mindset the three manangs that have evaluated the initial "no" to sex by Nicole.
Ha!ha!ha! if that is pinoy's mindset to "honor one's purity" there would not have corruption from top to bottom to top … HA!HA!HA!
Corruption is a cottage industry in my dear FlipLand to hell with hone and purity … HA!HA!HA!
renato,
try to hit the mark while arguing. honor of government officials is different from chastity of a woman. we are talking here about the chastity of a woman and not the honor of corrupt government officials.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Bravo ManuelB!
Thank you Madonna!!!!
Nicole's own action of trading a Green Card for dropping of Smith's Rape Case, betrays her credibility of
what had happened. I dont have any complain of a girl having fun with some U.S. Marines. But, if you get
drunk, and danced all night in a night club. Shows you that you have no control of yourself.
If you flirt, and get raped. You are bringing it to yourself. Other girls know how to take care of themselves. They
dont get raped. But, they dont have U.S. Green Cards, either…
Daniel Smith is an Acquitted Rapist. He was convicted of Rape. However, the decision was reversed because
of a back door trading of lawyers on both side. Nicole was given a U.S. Visa Green Card, in return for recanting
her earlier Affidavit.She was allowed to flee to the U.S. to end the case. Smith was flown out of the country after
the CA decision to close the case. It is a usual case of back door trading done in some court cases.
If you kill a man. And you pay Blood Money to prevent you from serving your time in Jail. Drop your case also.
You are still a Killer. Your guilt will not be erased. Same as Smith. He raped Nicole. Nicole was offered,
in kind and in cash to recant her testimony and cause the case to be dropped. Smith is still a Rapist. An
Acquitted Rapist…
Tasio,
Tatagalugin ko na.
Consuelo de bobo lang ang "reversal" mong yan!
Nakakahiya na kayo. "Acquitted Rapist"??
Walang modo!
As time goes by, Tasio, comments like this will sound and look and be exposed as being more and more screwheaded. Even you will be embarrassed and ashamed you posted such an obviously naive and ignorant statement. It's really dumb and wrong, dishonest and disdainful.
i don't know the other two "manangs" but for sure i know Justice Zenarosa. i had the sole of my shoes repaired many times over "prowling" the various quezon city court house. one's citations do not prove one's probity and honor. mr. marcos had his chest fully covered with medals of honor and bravey but the people would still consider him a "scoundrel", except perhaps the ilocanos and certain minority percentages in other regions.
her reputation among trial lawyers in quezon city is different from the sterling portrayal in her various citations.
and what are the chances of a case being raffled to the division of these 3 "manangs"? case raffle is a big joke. take it from someone who had been a court regular for 19 years.
proven integrity.. ho hooom…. hee haww… yawnnn.
but as i said, nicole won her case. the odious fix made by the court, from my standpoint is immaterial.
In rape cases the character assassination of the victim can never be used against her in defending the convicted person. That is a deed most foul!!!!!!!!!!
I personally believe that there was no rape but the manner in the way the acquittal was cooked up is grossly unfair to the woman.
Rape is a very personal crime and it is unfortunate that some sectors blew this up to the level of our colonial relations with the U.S. and now a high court has made it clear that the character of a woman can be used as a defense against a rape complaint. . I thought we were heads above the Taliban in respect to the human rights of the fairer sex.
If the US intervene just like what the anti-Americans are saying, then why would Smith be subjected to US Military Court Martial proceedings after the Court of Appeals in the Philippines acquitted him?
Smith will have to face Court Martial because he did not treat Suzette right after having sex with her by dumping her on the curbside. In other words, MISCONDUCT.
Think again… and Court Martial is NOT a joke.
Respect the decision of the Court of Appeals and stop being BITTER (to those who are against it).
They acquitted Smith based on EVIDENCE without the media and the process being OPEN to the public.
…and it is not only one Justice who acquitted Smith but THREE Justices.
This post title is really emblematic of the Lynch Mob's thinking. It demeans the Justice System that it used to praise to high heavens in the First Round of the Case when Ben Pozon issued a vote to convict. But when in the Second Round, the accused is acquitted, suddenly that same Justice System is a bunch of "manangs"–pejorative for old woman.
Then of course it cheaply and unethically uses the term "rapist".
You are a shameless and scurillous cur, MB, for writing such drivel.
DJB,
You are a cunt.
Right on DJB,
We can definitely tell who are IMMATURE and who are open-minded here.
How is a demure provinciana lass supposed to behave?
Well, she shouldn't be hanging around bars chugging half a pitcher of liquor using the pitcher itself!
The whole case is based on presumption of innocence, which means the prosecution has to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Isn't Daniel's admission in the Makati court that he had carnal knowledge on Nicole while he know that she was unconscious enough?
The case was so simple, but the CA justices did not argue based on the line of argument of Nicole. The 3 conditions of rape according to law are: (1) there was force or intimidation, (2) loss of reason or uncousciousness of the victim and (3) victim is below 12 years old. Nicole’s camp argued according to #2 because of all the drinks, but the justices focused on #1. It was a bad decision
Daniel paid Nicole P100,000. I will not pay a single peso if I'm innocent.