The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) has dismissed allegations made by 18 former bodyguards of former AKO Bicol Rep. and fugitive Zaldy Co, who claimed they delivered suitcases of cash to government officials, saying the accusations lacked credible evidence and appeared to be part of a coordinated narrative rather than independent testimonies.

NBI director Melvin Matibag told the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee that investigators found no sufficient basis to pursue charges against the officials named in the affidavits.

“The story was not supported by adequate evidence and corroboration,” Matibag said, citing the absence of credible witnesses, compromised photographic evidence, and reliance on a collective affidavit that failed to establish personal knowledge of the alleged transactions.

He said the claims appeared politically influenced and inconsistently evolving.

“Because they were being coached, their statements depended on political perceptions or political beliefs,” he said in Filipino. “In the first affidavit, two senators were mentioned. But when political alliances changed, the affidavit also changed and additional personalities were included.”

The former bodyguards initially named Senators Loren Legarda and Mark Villar as alleged recipients of cash deliveries, but the names were later dropped in subsequent statements.

Matibag said the central allegation — that suitcases contained cash — was largely based on hearsay.

He also questioned why the witnesses submitted a joint affidavit instead of individual sworn statements.

“There were members who did not know the entire story, but their statements were included in a collective narrative,” he said. “A collective execution does not convert hearsay into personal knowledge.”

‘Built narrative’

Matibag further said the NBI found indications the witnesses coordinated before going public, including group discussions and shared housing arrangements under the guidance of their counsel.

“The affidavit was the product of collective briefings, common housing, and content assembled by counsel,” he said, adding that the group had been staying together since November before their public statements in February.

“What this means is they built a narrative,” he said.

He also said lawyer Levi Baligod allegedly approached one of the former bodyguards to form the group, and noted claims that allowances were given to witnesses, which could raise ethical concerns.

‘Bellboys’ tag, Marine claim questioned

Matibag also cast doubt on the credibility of the same group, referring to them as “bellboys” instead of ex-Marines.

He said only three were honorably retired Marines, 12 were dishonorably discharged, while others were Army reservists or civilians, some with short or irregular military service.

“The invocation of Marine honor has no institutional basis in this group,” he said.

Matibag stressed that labels such as “ex-Marine” do not strengthen testimony.

“Courts rely on evidence, not labels. Probative value is based on personal knowledge,” he said, adding that claims must come from direct observation, not hearsay or secondhand accounts.