In an attempt to bolster the case against suspended Bureau of Corrections Director General Gerald Bantag in the Percy Lapid murder case, the probers have introduced two circumstances that they think will establish the missing link that will prove the latter to be the mastermind or ridiculously referred to as one of the two masterminds of the twin murders.
Before we dissect the proffered additional proof, let us demolish this vexing theory of two masterminds. If they say that the former BuCor chief is the source of the instructions to commit the heinous crimes, then the other alleged mastermind (Ricardo Zulueta) cannot be said to be the other mastermind. If their supposition is true that Zulueta executed the plan to kill hatched by the former, then he becomes an accomplice of the mastermind and not another mastermind.
They say that the motive to eliminate the radio commentator is to make him pay for his scathing attacks against the person of the subject of scurrilous commentaries, but have not presented any proof that Zulueta also received vitriolic criticisms from the deceased. So what will his (Zulueta) motive be to kill the broadcaster, when he has no axe to grind against the radio commentator? How can he, therefore, be another mastermind? Under the law, assuming that indeed he performed the acts alleged to have been committed by him, then he is an accomplice and not another mastermind.
Let us now go to their claim that their new evidence, which is a video showing that one or two of the respondent inmates were seen to have gone to the office of Zulueta on the day or before the killing of the middleman (Pastaña) coming from their prison cell, as an added proof to establish the murder link to Bantag. Erroneous. The video establishes a circumstance that the respondent/respondents have/have communication with Zulueta on the day of the murder of the middleman.
That does not prove, however, that they went to see Zulueta to receive instruction from him to permanently silence Pastaña. But it may be offered in evidence to validate their claim that they have communication with Zulueta. Such may strengthen their link with Zulueta but definitely, it does not show a credible connection showing that Bantag instructed Zulueta to relay the order to end the life of the middleman to the respondent inmates. It may be used against Zulueta but not against Bantag.
Speaking before the 86th anniversary of the National Bureau of Investigation, Secretary Jesus Crispin “Boying” Remulla cited a detail on Bantag’s whereabouts on a particular day and his demeanor relative to the deceased’s going to the latter’s residence to take pictures of his house and the vehicles parked in front of it, as a “significant lead” and Bantag’s possible motive in allegedly masterminding the slay of the broadcast block timer-journalist. He was quoted as saying:
“It’s a significant lead that he (Bantag) was absent on the day (graduation ceremonies) because on that day Percy Lapid went to his house and his vehicles. And the narrations given to me are very clear about this matter.”
According to the Justice Secretary, Lapid’s visit to snoop around Bantag’s house formed the basis of his “Cinderella Story” on his radio program “Lapid Fire”, to expose the alleged wealth of an anonymous government official. It was a blind item. The dead critic did not identify the “Cinderella” government official amassing wealth as Bantag.
The justice chief elaborated on this new “significant lead in this wise:
“After that visit, Percy Lapid put out the “Cinderella Man” story. That was the basis. The day itself, when General Bantag learned that Percy Lapid was there in Laguna, he got mad. He went back to Laguna and skipped attending the graduation.”
“His decision not to return is a sign also that he was very mad about it, he was very, very livid about it. “
Secretary Remulla took note of the fact that the alleged plot to murder Lapid commenced on 17 September 2022. It was around the same time that Lapid aired the blind item on the “Cinderella Man” on his radio show. He concluded by saying:
“There’s a string, that ties everything together.”
Not necessarily. The “string” is not the link that will tie up Bantag to the twin murders. It may only show motive. The motive must be followed through by concrete steps to execute the plan to kill. The link should be testimonies from the respondent inmates and the other enforcers’ murder plan pointing to Bantag as the brains behind it. There is no credible admissible evidence, whether testimonial, documentary, or physical, to connect Bantag to the crimes being charged against him.
Even his non-attendance to the aforesaid graduation ceremonies of inmates at the New Bilibid Prison is insignificant. He could have fallen ill with diarrhea hence he could not attend the event and not because “he was very, very livid”. Even assuming that he was insanely mad on that day, that does not prove he plotted the murders and took steps to execute them.
Those two proffered circumstances still do not establish the missing link.