Livestream catches flaring tempers during Maguindanao massacre trial

Prosecution and defense lawyers in the Maguindanao massacre trial engaged in a heated exchange during Wednesday's trial at Taguig City — and everything was caught on camera and streamed live over the Internet. For the first time in the history of the Philippine judiciary, a court proceeding was aired live through webcast at the Supreme Court's website, pursuant to an earlier ruling allowing live coverage of the high-profile massacre trial. On Wednesday's hearing, private prosecutor Nena Santos, legal counsel for Maguindanao Gov. Esmael Mangudadatu, insisted that Kenny Dalandag be allowed to take the witness stand after a Manila court junked the motion seeking to disallow him from testifying. Dalandag claimed to be part of the group that participated in the killing of 57 people on Nov. 23, 2009 in Ampatuan town. Among the victims were Mangudadatu’s wife and two sisters. Defense lawyer Sigfrid Fortun, in last week's hearing, used as basis the pending motion at the Manila court to block Dalandag's testimony. Judge Jocelyn Solis-Reyes of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court Branch 221 eventually agreed to defer Dalandag's testimony not due to the petition with the Manila court, but due to a similar but separate motion to exclude Dalandag’s testimony that was filed before her sala. "Kenny Dalandag has been identified since PI [preliminary investigation]. We want him to testify," Santos said. Santos said the fact that the defense was pushing to prevent Dalandag from testifying in court because of his admission to being a conspirator meant that "they (the accused) admit there is a conspiracy." Implicated in the grisly crime are members of the powerful Ampatuan clan, including its patriarch, Andal Ampatuan Sr., a former Maguindanao governor. It was during this point that Santos started raising her voice, which irked Fortun. "Can we reprimand Attorney Santos for shouting at me," Fortun asked the judge. Santos denied shouting at Fortun, but the defense lawyer insisted that she did. During the proceedings, the prosecution also pointed out that while Fortun's camp was asking the court to prevent Dalandag from testifying, another defense lawyer, Paris Real, was asking the court the opposite. They said that in May, Real's client Sajid Ampatuan requested the judge to issue a subpoena so that Dalandag could testify on his allegation that Sajid was present in the November 22 dinner where the massacre was allegedly planned. In response, Real said: "At this point, it will already be highly improper despite any subpoena to have Dalandag testify." When asked if he could already cross examine Lakmodin Saliao, another prosecution witness, Real refused and said he first has to review the transcript of stenographic notes of the witness' testimony so he could make an "intelligent examination." Real was the legal counsel who earlier insinuated in court, during cross examinations of several expert witnesses, that the massacre victims could have either died through insect bites or by accidentally shooting at each other. "I am not ready now," Real said, adding that he needed time to prepare. In response, the prosecution said it sees no reason why Real would be incapable of cross examining Saliao. "We think that Atty. Real has been diligent enough in preparing for his cross examinations based on previous hearings," said prosecutor Amor Robles. Real responded: "So is the prosecution saying that they have not been diligent?" "Move to strike your honor. We did not say that. We were merely making an observation," Robles said with a raised voice. "And that was my observation too," Real said in response. Meanwhile, private prosecutor Harry Roque, who represents families of 15 of the 57 massacre victims, also engaged in a heated argument with Fortun. Insisting on not allowing Dalandag to take the witness stand, Fortun suggested that the trial for now proceed on the civil aspect of the case and just let Roque present relatives of the massacre victims to testify on the damages they would be claiming. But like the other prosecutors, Roque pushed to have Dalandag testify in court. “Kenny Dalandag is also part of the civil aspect of our complaint." Fortun said Roque’s move was not possible and reiterated that Dalandag could not yet be allowed to testify. "But, your honor, Atty Fortun has no right to determine the rightness or wrongness of my argument," Roque replied. Fortun said Roque did not seem to be aware about an earlier agreement between the judge and the lawyers to defer Dalandag’s testimony pending the resolution of the Ampatuan camp’s motion to exclude Dalandag as a witness. "Atty Roque just comes in here whenever he wants to," Fortun said, pointing out Roque’s absences in past hearings. Even Judge Solis-Reyes was not spared from the heated exchange. At one point during the hearing, Saliao, a former long-time househelp of the Ampatuans, appeared confused when asked to identify Andal Sr. in court. The prosecution asked Saliao what was the connection between the Andal Sr. whom he allegedly saw plot the attack and the Andal Sr. who was seated at the courtroom. "Mag-ama po sila," Saliao said, obviously not understanding the question and was instead referring to the relationship between Andal Sr. and his son, co-accused Andal Jr. To help the witness, the judge repeated to Saliao the prosecution's question, but Fortun questioned Solis-Reyes’ action. With a raised voice, Solis-Reyes clarified to Fortun that she was merely repeating the prosecution's question. — KBK, GMA News