DOJ to appeal acquittal of 2 ‘Alabang Boys’

Even if appealing an acquittal subjects the accused to double jeopardy, the Department of Justice will exhaust available legal remedies to seek the reversal of a Muntinlupa court's acquittal of two high-profile drug suspects. Speaking to reporters after meeting with a group led by former Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) head Dionisio Santiago, De Lima said that a closer scrutiny of the Munlinlupa Regional Trial Court Branch 204's decision would reveal "a gross misappreciation of procedure." The principle of double jeopardy refers to holding the accused for trial twice for the same offense. "An acquittal has double jeopardy issues. But there are, I think, exceptions, although very rare exceptions. We will try that out. We will try a motion for reconsideration because we think something went wrong," said De Lima. "Ordinarily, there's no remedy anymore after an acquittal. But in this case, we noticed aspects that can be cited as exceptions to the general rule. It's gross misappreciation," she added. Last Friday, Judge Juanita Guerrero acquitted Jorge Joseph and Richard Brodett — two of the three so-called Alabang Boys — on the basis of the break in the chain of custody of the drugs seized from the two scions of affluent families in September 2008. Links The judge said the prosecution failed to establish all links in the chain of custody of the drug evidence, particularly between the time PDEA forensic chemist Rona Mae Aguillon examined the confiscated narcotics and the time Santiago held a press conference to present to the media the confiscated drugs. On Thursday, De Lima said that there was no break in the chain of custody because the seized drugs presented at the press conference were only samples from the ones to be examined by Aguillon. "The handling prosecutors said that the forensic chemist explained during the rebuttal that what was presented during the press conference [was] the representative samples," she said. The Justice chief likewise said that Judge Guerrero may have been "overly technical" by focusing on the press conference held by PDEA. "If I may use the phrase, she made a mountain out of a molehill when it comes to the holding of the press conference. There was nothing wrong with the holding of the press conference provided that the integrity of the evidence was preserved," she said. De Lima also underscored that the trial court was unable to find any errors in PDEA's buy-bust operation. "In the first place, she ruled there was a valid buy-bust operation. So if there's a valid buy-bust operation, why will you not admit, or consider as admissible, the evidence just because of a perceived break in the link?" she asked. Why a turnaround? De Lima also stressed that when the trial court denied Brodett's and Joseph's petitions for bail, Judge Guerrero said that there was enough evidence to secure the two suspects' convictions. The order denying the petitions for bail, promulgated Oct. 4, 2010, also noted: "All links in the custody of the drug evidence were presented to prove with absolute certainty that the confiscated drugs are the same batch of Ecstasy turned over... as evidence custodian to the crime laboratory for examination by Agullon and their identification in court." De Lima then questioned why, in a complete turnaround, the judge ruled last Friday that state prosecutors failed to establish the chain of custody of the evidence. "When you say 'to warrant a conviction,' that is tantamount to saying it's [guilty] beyond reasonable doubt. So if that was the state of evidence at that time, during the bail hearing, why is the decision now on the merits different?" she asked. - KBK, GMA News