Filing the case against the suspects in the Degamo slay based on their recanted sworn statements and at the same time filing a perjury case against them as announced by the Department of Justice is gross ignorance of criminal procedure as well as the rules on evidence.
If the original sworn statements by the suspects were not recanted, then the government undoubtedly would have a solid case against them. With their formal recantation, there is not even a probable cause to speak of for the filing of the murder case in court unless there are witnesses who saw them commit the crime or have personal knowledge of the suspects’ plan to execute the offense coming forward and detailing the circumstances in a sworn statement to be presented in the preliminary investigation stage.
Their positive identification of the suspects as the perpetrators of the crime could be adequate and sufficient for a judgement of conviction when they are tried in court. The prosecutors can also introduce circumstantial evidence that will add to the positive identification of the accused to further strengthen their case.
Simultaneous filing of the murder complaint based on their recanted confession and the perjury case are at war with each other. It will only demonstrate not only the weakness of the prosecution’s theory but its unpreparedness as well. The perjury case will give the defense an arsenal to demolish the murder case.
The accused can use the perjury case by arguing that their original statements cannot hold because the prosecution is charging them with lying with their statements. So, if they are lying, how can those statements be deemed truthful and become the basis of the filing of the murder complaint? Since the government filed the case based on their lies, how can they be adjudged guilty of the crime of murder?
If the government lawyers file a perjury case against the recanting suspects and they are found guilty of lying, then they will be guilty of perjury of a lesser crime, and necessarily they will get away with murder because the original confessions or admissions will lose their validity.
If, however, they are found innocent by the court on the perjury charge it would mean that their confessions to the crime will be admissible in court as declarations against interest and will weigh heavily on their guilt. The better option therefore for the government is to file the perjury case and put on hold the institution of the murder indictment and if it has already been filed, it should withdraw it pending the resolution of the former.
The two criminal cases cannot be filed at the same time because it is contradictory. Should the government persist in pursuing its present legal position, it will suffer a legal debacle and whoever engineered the Degamo slay will escape from accountability for the crimes he or she and whoever the accomplices and accessories are have committed.
All these imminent legal disasters could be avoided if the government official concerned could only zip his mouth and be judicious in his public, hasty, and reckless pronouncements on the guilt of the suspects.