Body found in Navotas waters not of Ruby Rose - experts
07/28/2009 | 08:46 PM
Doubts on whether or not the body found inside a cemented steel drum in Navotas waters last June was that of missing Ruby Rose Barrameda were cast Tuesday before the Department of Justice (DOJ) panel investigating the case.
This was after experts tapped by the defense branded as inconclusive the evidence presented by the police in identifying Ruby Rose, the sister of actress Rochelle Barrameda who had been missing since March 2007.
Dr. Danilo Magtanong, an odontology expert, said Ruby Rose’s dental records did not match those of the dead woman fished from the waters off Navotas last June 10
“Her (Ruby Rose) first molar tooth found in her dental records taken when she was 15 in 1996 could not be found in this cadaver, which only had third molar tooth. So they do not match," he said in his findings submitted to the defense panel.
Dr. Raquel Fortun, forensic pathology expert of the University of the Philippines, said during Tuesday’s preliminary investigation that the personal effects found with the cadaver could not be considered as conclusive proof that the body was that of Ruby Rose.
“The body found was already in an advanced stage of decomposition that made it very hard to identify. You cannot use identification of relatives and clothes of the body in this case," she said.
Among those accused of killing Ruby Rose were her estranged husband, Manuel Jimenez III; father-in-law Manuel II; and Manuel’s uncle, Lope. The three had repeatedly denied involvement in the crime.
The DOJ panel last week granted the defense’s motion to visit the Philippine National Police (PNP) crime laboratory to examine the evidence that led police investigators to conclude that the cadaver found in Navotas was that of Ruby Rose. - GMANews.TV
This was after experts tapped by the defense branded as inconclusive the evidence presented by the police in identifying Ruby Rose, the sister of actress Rochelle Barrameda who had been missing since March 2007.
Dr. Danilo Magtanong, an odontology expert, said Ruby Rose’s dental records did not match those of the dead woman fished from the waters off Navotas last June 10
“Her (Ruby Rose) first molar tooth found in her dental records taken when she was 15 in 1996 could not be found in this cadaver, which only had third molar tooth. So they do not match," he said in his findings submitted to the defense panel.
Dr. Raquel Fortun, forensic pathology expert of the University of the Philippines, said during Tuesday’s preliminary investigation that the personal effects found with the cadaver could not be considered as conclusive proof that the body was that of Ruby Rose.
“The body found was already in an advanced stage of decomposition that made it very hard to identify. You cannot use identification of relatives and clothes of the body in this case," she said.
Among those accused of killing Ruby Rose were her estranged husband, Manuel Jimenez III; father-in-law Manuel II; and Manuel’s uncle, Lope. The three had repeatedly denied involvement in the crime.
The DOJ panel last week granted the defense’s motion to visit the Philippine National Police (PNP) crime laboratory to examine the evidence that led police investigators to conclude that the cadaver found in Navotas was that of Ruby Rose. - GMANews.TV
