ARTICLE 2:

Of Whistle Blowers and Bong Revilla—

I find it odd, how a country can so easily trust whistle blowers. They

are shady to begin with, they've been part of whatever it is they are

currently pointing and blaming other people for from the get go, and

basically, they’re whistle blowing to get away from it all.

Benhur Luy—the man accusing Bong Revilla of plunder—is a clear

example.

The crime of Plunder is committed by a Public Officer, who by

himself or in connivance with others, has amassed, accumulated, or

acquired ill-gotten wealth through combination or series of criminal

acts specified under RA 7080 in the aggregate amount of at least

fifty (50) Million pesos.

Yet—and believe me, I’m as surprised as you—it seems the

prosecution wasn't able to sufficiently prove this as easily as I

expected them. In fact, in the course of the bail hearings, I saw the

lack of evidence against a Senator who was already slammed and

judged by public opinion, making me wonder (as you may have

already seen in my last post) if the country’s justice system has been

swayed merely by the pressure of the court of public opinion.

• In terms of kickbacks, the prosecution was counting on Luy to

offer evidence without reasonable doubt. He didn't.

• Luy merely alleges that Revilla received funds from the PDAF

scam proceeds—but based on his testimony, it seems it was all

based on his own assumptions, concluded from information

provided by other people.

• There is no proof that Cambe was Senator Revilla’s agent in

the commission of the crime charged, or at the very least, that

Cambe gave the alleged kickbacks to Senator Revilla.

• Cambe was apparently out of the country on some dates when

Luy allegedly met with him and handed him the kickbacks.

This evidence creates doubt as to the probable guilt not only of

Cambe, but more so of Revilla.


And as far as Luy goes?

• He never gave any money to Revilla.

• He never saw Revilla go to Janet Lim Napoles’ office.

• He never saw Napoles give Revilla any amount of money.

• He never saw cash delivered to the home of Revilla.

• He never had personal knowledge about the alleged scheming

between Napoles and Revilla.

• He never saw Revilla conspire, transact or deal with any one

else to support his case.

Basically, all the information he knows was given to him from other

people, making it all hearsay.