Comment-Jun Perez
Comment-Jun Perez
x----------------------------------------------------x
COMMENT
( To the Motion for Reconsideration of the
Order dated 23 April 2020 )
2
of guilt is therefore on the prosecution. In People vs. Tolentino,[1] the
Supreme Court ruled that:
3
Office of the City Prosecutor of Malabon; (2) To prove that all the
essential elements of Estafa are present in this case; (3) That he
personally transacted with the accused Angel Perez for the
redemption of the mortgaged Toyota Fortuner; (4) To prove the
damage and losses sustained by the private complainant in this case;
(5) To prove the averments in the initial Complaint-Affidavit
submitted before the Honorable Office of the City Prosecutor of
Malabon;
“CROSS EXAMINATION
(Atty. Richard V. Gomez) – Preliminary Questions
4
Question: Mr. Witness, when does your judicial
affidavit was executed, may I know?
----------
“(Atty. Gomez to witness)
A. ~ Yes. Sir
Q. ~ How?
A. ~
“Bastanaririnigkolangusapannilanamagkikitasaganonl
ugar.”
3
TSN, dated 12 December 2019, page 2
5
Q. ~ So right there and then, you knew that Susan
talking with Angel Perez, that was the first time that
you saw or heard Susan talking with Angel Perez?
A. ~ Yes. Sir.
Q. ~ But you have not yet seen Angel Perez that time?
A. ~“ Di pa po, Sir.”[4]
-------------
4
TSN, 12 December 2019, page 4
6
15. When Kelly Rico testified before the Honorable Court,
most of his answer during examination raised irregularities in his
credibility as witness that would create doubt on the guilt of the
accused beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, acquittal in favor of the
accused should necessarily be rendered by the Honorable Court.
7
THE LAW OFFICE OF ATTY. RICHARD V. GOMEZ
Malabon City Legal Department, 7th Floor MAlabon City Hall
Sevilla Boulevard, San Agustin Malabon City
E-mail: [email protected]
Mobile No.: 09756977381
By:
Copy furnished: