See shrink, Madriaga told
‘These are people who do not know how to tell the truth; all they know is how to destroy other people’s reputations.’
Text size
Share
‘These are people who do not know how to tell the truth; all they know is how to destroy other people’s reputations.’
Share
Former Supreme Court associate justice Samuel Martires on Tuesday criticized the supplemental affidavit filed in connection with the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte, saying his name was wrongly included.
In a radio interview, Martires said his name did not appear in the original affidavit and was only added later without basis.
“These are people who do not know how to tell the truth; all they know is how to destroy other people’s reputations,” he said.
“If you think what you are saying is true, go see a psychiatrist because something is wrong about the way you think,” he told Madriaga.
He also questioned the affidavit’s relevance, saying the House Committee on Justice should have scrutinized its contents more carefully.
“What I find troubling is that the House Committee on Justice should have read Madriaga’s affidavit, as it is relevant to the impeachment trial of Sara Duterte,” Martires said.
Martires added that the supplemental affidavit appeared to raise allegations unrelated to the complaint. He also directly addressed Ramil Madriaga over the claims.
Pieces of puzzle coming together
Lawyer Salvador Paolo Panelo Jr., meanwhile, alleged that Madriaga contacted Lt. Col. Dennis Nolasco, to testify against Duterte to strengthen accusations against the Vice President.
“We’re not relying on mere speculation — we have evidence. There is a text message involving Lieutenant Colonel Nolasco, a former DepEd security officer of VP Sara. In the message, Lt. Col. Nolasco is told: ‘Turn against them. Just say you gave me the confidential funds, and I will be the one to explain where I distributed them. Don’t worry about me — I’ll be freed because I will become a state witness,’” Panelo said.
Madriaga, who has earlier surfaced as a self-confessed aide and alleged bagman, has been central to the House inquiry and has made several claims under oath, including allegations involving high-profile political figures.
The camp of Duterte has repeatedly questioned his credibility, noting his legal troubles and motives for testifying. In previous statements, her allies described him as acting “out of desperation,” casting doubt on the reliability of his accusations.
