Panelo Jr.: Madriaga likely ‘star’ defense witness
If the prosecution presents Ramil Madriaga, it’s their funeral. That will be slaughtered in the defense team’s cross-examination.
Text size
If the prosecution presents Ramil Madriaga, it’s their funeral. That will be slaughtered in the defense team’s cross-examination.
Ramil Madriaga could become a “star witness” for Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense if the prosecution calls him to testify in her impeachment trial, Duterte’s lawyer Paolo Panelo Jr. said Wednesday.
Panelo said the defense is prepared to use evidence from Duterte’s two perjury complaints against Madriaga to challenge his credibility through cross-examination.
“If the prosecution presents Ramil Madriaga, it’s their funeral. That will be slaughtered in the defense team’s cross-examination,” Panelo told reporters during an online news briefing.
Duterte filed a second perjury complaint against Madriaga on 17 August over a supplemental affidavit he executed 11 April. Her first complaint, filed in March, accused Madriaga of making false statements in an earlier affidavit.
Panelo said there were “rumblings” that the prosecution may no longer call Madriaga as a witness, although he said no formal decision had been communicated to Duterte’s legal team.
He said Madriaga could still testify because he is also on Duterte’s impeachment defense witness list.
Chronic liar
“So even if the prosecution does not call him to testify, the defense may call him precisely for this reason, because we have already established in the first and second perjury complaints that this man has repeatedly lied,” Panelo said.
Panelo said Duterte’s lawyers would provide the impeachment defense team with the second perjury complaint and its supporting evidence for possible use in the Senate trial.
Panelo said the second complaint is based on Madriaga’s supplemental affidavit and also strengthens Duterte’s first perjury case because of alleged falsehoods in the latter document.
“We believe that the supplemental affidavit, and the lies contained in it, prove that his first affidavit also constituted perjury,” Panelo said.
The first complaint has already been submitted for resolution, he said. If the motion to consolidate is denied, the prosecutor could still resolve the first complaint separately.
Panelo acknowledged that the perjury cases are separate from the impeachment proceedings but said they could affect the credibility of the prosecution’s case.
2 cases to be consolidated
VP Duterte’s legal team will also ask the Taguig City Prosecutor’s Office to consolidate the two perjury complaints, arguing that the cases involve related allegations and evidence and should be resolved together.
Panelo said a motion for consolidation would be filed as the first complaint is already submitted for resolution.
“We’re hoping for a consolidation so that it will be resolved together. Instead of doing two separate proceedings, one proceeding na lang, kasi related naman yung allegations, related din yung proof,” Panelo said during a virtual news briefing.
The first complaint was filed in March over statements Madriaga made in an earlier affidavit. The second, filed 17 August, challenges statements in a supplemental affidavit he executed 11 April and later read before the House Committee on Justice during its impeachment proceedings against Duterte.
