Three paragraphs from Nicole’s affidavit damn Smith even more.
Par. 8 With the events at the Neptune Club in mind, I keep on asking myself, if Daniel Smith wanted to rape me, why would he carry me out of the Neptune Club using the main entrance in full view of the security guard and the other sources? Why would the van park right in front of Neptune Club? Why would Daniel Smith and his companions bring me to the seawall of Alaba Pier and casually leave this area that was well lighted and with many people roaming around? If they believed that I was raped, would they have not dumped me instead in a dimly lit area along the highway going to Alaba Pier to avoid detection?
Those questions are not only immaterial but they can be answered very simply with “maybe they didn’t give a crap.”
Par 9 “Recalling my testimony, I ask myself now how could I have remembered this if witnesses told the court that I passed out and looked unconscious when I was brought to the van by Daniel Smith. How could I have resisted his advances given this condition? Daniel Smith and I were alone on the third row of the van which had limited space and I do not recall anyone inside the van who held my hand or any part of my body. What I can recall is that there was very loud music and shouting inside the van.”
So she was so drunk she’s not sure she was f*^$%*d without her consent?
DATE RAPE is what you call that.
How can an unconscious or semi-conscious woman give consent?
Absence of resistance or the ability to resist does not necessarily mean consent. It could mean fear or inability to exercise judgment due to extraneous factors like too much alcohol.
Par. 10 “If the travel from Neptune Club took only several minutes and with the driver of the van trying to beat the curfew time of his passengers, how could I have instantly regained my consciousness and talked to the people upon reaching the seawall of Alaba Pier? When people gathered around me at the seawall, everyone seemed to have drawn the conclusion that I was raped except for one who called me a bitch.”
Doesn’t this paragraph confirm what she said about her state of consciousness in par.9
“How could I have instantly regained my consciousness and talked to the people upon reaching the seawall of Alaba Pier”?
Nicole could still not bring herself around to categorically stating that she either engaged in consensual sex or she was raped. I was too drunk, I’m not sure anymore what happened is what her affidavit says.
The case is People of the Philippines vs. Daniel Smith not Nicole vs. Daniel Smith. Nicole was the People’s witness against Smith. Her testimony plus evidence of sexual activity is what led to Smith’s conviction. In other words, there was evidence that there was sex. Smith admitted he f*%#ed her.
Nicole now says she was too drunk/barely conscious when the f*&%#ing happened. In that case, Smith raped Nicole.
Let’s leave Nicole in peace and Smith in jail.
Popularity: 1% [?]
MB,
Reasonable doubt!
This is now all over the international news including Wall Street Journal.
Justice Secretary Gonzalez said that if he had granted Suzette’s request to remove the MEATY portions of her rape affidavit in 2005, there would NEVER been a rape case.
Yes, convict Smith after Suzette already submitted an affidavit that there was consensual sex.
So that the international community (aka other countries) will look at the Philippine Judicial System even MORE of a JOKE.
You have the most exquisite sense of irony, Meeh.
DJB,
Reasonable doubt about Nicole’s state of mind?
“5. Daniel Smith’s witnesses said that while we were at the Neptune Club, I sat on Daniel Smith’s lap and that we kissed each other passionately. I remember that before I met Daniel Smith at the Neptune Club, all I ate was a slice of pizza at the Grand Leisure Hotel. After the pizza, everything else was alcoholic drinks from vodka sprite, B52, Singaporean sling, B53, long island ice tea to bullfrog all of which I drank bottoms up. I do not recall Daniel Smith having ordered any alcoholic drink for me. My drinks were all paid for by Chris Mills who invited me to go to the Neptune Club.”
“6. I had no opportunity to deny in court that I kissed Daniel Smith but with the amount of alcoholic mixed drinks I took, my low tolerance level of alcohol and with only a slice of pizza all night, it dawned upon me that I may have possibly lost my inhibitions, became so intimate with Daniel Smith and did more than just dancing and talking with him like everyone else on the dance floor. Looking back, I would not have agreed to talk with Daniel Smith and dance with him no less than three times if I did not enjoy his company or was at least attracted to him since I met him for the very first time on the dance floor of Neptune Club.”
ok boys, how do you usually determine the consent of your partner? do you ask her, in the heat of the moment,”do you agree without doubt in you mind to my putting mine inside yours right now?”? She goes on with moans and heavy breathing, her legs tightly embracing you and you ask, “i don’t hear a yes! did you say yes?!”
ricelander,
Here’s a tip: Don’t mess with a woman who’s too drunk. You could end up like Smith.
Here’s something to keep in mind: The world is unfair. Even your wife can cry rape if she, after a lot of foreplay and actual intercourse, tells you to stop because she’s had enough and you don’t stop.
The world is unfair, yeah, I know that.
Don’t mess around with a woman who’s too drunk; you could end up like Smith, you say?
I woman need not be too drunk. She needs only claim to be too drunk. A woman can also say yes now and cry rape tomorrow. So many possibilities.
Is your son good looking? He’s better off gay! haha
ricelander,
a lesbian can be raped but a gay man cannot be raped?
the lack of Physical force is a strong evidence of effective consent.
RAPE can be very difficult to prove. Nicole’s case is no brainer. Strong evidences- inability to give effective consent due to intoxication, intimidation, reckless “do not care” GI and excessive force were used.
” People of the Philippines versus Smith” remember that Folks. It’s not about Nicole Versus Smith.
to leytenian: That’s a good point that this is also THE STATE versus One Person. Think of it as THE STATE versus Jose Camano, or THE STATE versus some poor schmuck-of-a-farmer.
The citizenry should always be fearful of the power of THE STATE to put people in jail. “Not guilty” (and stays out of jail) should always be presumed when “reasonable doubt” gets introduced. As ricelander has alluded to, the next “put-him-in-jail” target may be ManuelB’s son.
Zambales Representative Magsaysay said that when Suzette and the witnesses talked to her on November 01, 2005, what she said was consistent on her new affidavit and that somebody influenced her to sue Smith for rape.
Yehey! We are the JOKE of the WORLD now.
DO NOT let Smith go home so that the world will LAUGH at the Philippine Judicial System even MORE.
That was my sarcastic comment.
The Philippines MUST send Smith to go home NOW.
Meeh,
“Zambales Representative Magsaysay said that when Suzette and the witnesses talked to her on November 01, 2005, what she said was consistent on her new affidavit” –
that she was so drunk she didn’t know what happened to her?
” and that somebody influenced her to sue Smith for rape.” –
Convinced her? Paid her? Intimidated her? How was she influenced exactly and by whom?
mb…
You didn’t think that Ursua, Maza and her Gabriela Party, etc., influenced her?
Think again.
Suzette finally WOKE UP!
@leytenian
interesting… so a legal suit can only be begun by a private individual, but ONCE STARTED is considered as an action by the state… so once started, the original in a sense has lost ALL control over the process…
frankly i find that a bit disappointing and the logic confuses me.
leytenian,
No wonder why the Philippine Judicial System is a JOKE is because of the people like you.
You are ignoring all the facts because you are BITTER.
GabbyD: the original plaintiff retains a significant amount of relevance and control whenever the plaintiff’s testimony is critical to obtaining conviction.
meeh, as you say so :)
Exactly! This is date rape! You can’t give consent in retrospect and she obviously did not have the ability to give consent when Smith admits to sleeping with her.
Thank you for posting this! Why do people think that passing out drunk is equal to giving everybody in the room permission to use you? It’s not!
Ano ba nyang kahihiyang ginawa mo Nicole sana nagpabayad ka na lang hindi mo pa kinaladkad ang pangalan ng pilipinas masama na nga ang reputasyon natin sa ibang bansa lalo pang nabaon ang tagal mo namng makonsensya bagay me Karma nyan “Pukol mo balik sayo” akala ko ayaw mo sa kano eh anong ginagawa mo rito sa states?di parang kinain mo rin ang isinuka mo.Nyak subagay malaki ang babayran ng US kay Smith pagnakataon danyos sa kanya nyan kaso nga lang kawawa din si kano dahil maraming taon din ang nawala sa kanya”Butata pa ang tinalo dapat opisyal ang tinalo baka malaking pera pa ang nakuha mo.Sa Totoo lang walang magalit.
Well Evi, who do you believe? Nicole or uhmmm…Nicole?!
I think it depends on what you were doing and saying b4 you “passed out”. Maybe she gave or indicated consent b4 she “passed out”.
Her affidavit seems to suggest she was passionately kissing and dancing with the accused and that there was no resistance when they left. Maybe she said “NO” later, in which case the accused had no right to have sex with her. But she has not said that now and in fact appears to “recant.”
Sana naisip mo me mga magulang at kapatid din nyan nyung hirap at sakit na dinulot mo sa pamilya nya sana naisip mo nyon himdi kapakanan mo lang,baka nga kayat nag sundalo nyan para makapag aral ng kolehiyo o tumulong din sa pamilya nya. Sana naisip mo nyon sa totoo lang!
Hannah,
Hindi si Nicole ang kumaladkad sa ngalan ng Pilipinas kundi ang mga makakaliwang ginawang usaping pampulitika ang isang kasong kriminal. Ngayon titirahin ninyo si Nicole? Kaya nga walang nangyari sa kaso eh!
Totoo lang talagang di papayagan ng US makulong nyan sa kulungan ng mga preso dyan dahil una sundalo sya pero kung civilian sya maari pa me sarili silang kulungan dito nyang mga sundalo nila na ang kasama nya mga gumawa rin ng krimen sa may Quantico doon sila kayat kahit anong gawin nila talagang di sila papayag.
DJ
Mahirap paniwalaan kasing narape sya ewan ko kayo lang nyata ang naniniwala sa kanya blessed your heart.
DJ
kaya lang naman sya nakakapagdudang na rape eh nyung puro lalaking kasama nya pinilahan na sya noon bakit isa lang eh di ibig sabihin type nya rin nakuha pa nong kanong magcondom kahiyaan na lang siguro nyon kayat nagbangong puri na lang sya at least na realize nya na kahit papaano hindi gaanong masagwa kasi rape,kung pilipino kaya nyan idedemanda nya rin? kaso malas nya kano sya.Sorry na lang sya
DJB,
“I think it depends on what you were doing and saying b4 you “passed out”. Maybe she gave or indicated consent b4 she “passed out”.”
Absurf. Aint no such thing as “hey guys I’m about to pass out but feel free to do what you feel like anyway….”
Passed out is passed. You take your chances if you think consent b4 passing out is ok. Like I said, watch our if she differently when she wakes up and says “you raped me while I was unconscious”. If you say “you gave me prior clearance” she will say “i don’t remember sating that, I was too drunk” And then you will say,”well i have witnesses who heard you say that” and she will reply, “and those same witnesses will say I was very very drunk.” So ipit ka pa din sa rape.
@DJB
Unless she said, “Hey, have sex with me while I can’t do anything about it,” then yes, having sex with a passed out girl you just met is rape. Dancing and kissing a guy is not equal to agreeing to have sex after. It’s agreeing to dancing and kissing.
This testimony shouldn’t be taken out of context. (Aside from the fact that her statement came once she was paid) Yes, it’s been three years and what does that mean?
That it’s been three years, and it’s easier to let things go? Especially things one never wanted to happen in the first place?
That this possibly traumatized girl spent three years being asked, and I’m paraphrasing from her statements here, “How could you resist if you were unconscious?” and to explain someone else’s actions: “Well, why did he use this door and not that? Why did he dump you here and not there?” And after three years, she finally said, “I don’t know.”
All of this context should not be disregarded when the court judges this case. Nicole didn’t shame the Philippines by being a confused girl swayed by the promise of a better life. It’s giving the Philippines an opportunity to show we’re capable of nuanced understanding, and won’t just take the statement at face value.
Quit giving Nicole excuse alam nya nyung ginagawa nya kahiyaan na lang kayat ang sigaw nya RAPE sana GABAAN sya nang matikman nya ang balik ng pinaggagawa nya.
Style nya BULOK