Defense witnesses’ memory lapses put credibility under scrutiny — lawyer

The inability of some witnesses presented by Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense to recall basic details during cross-examination could undermine the credibility of their testimonies, particularly their claims concerning properties and financial transactions linked to the Vice President, a lawyer said.

Atty. Severo Madrona Jr., professorial lecturer at the University of the Philippines National College of Public Administration and Governance, said the prosecution was testing whether the defense witnesses could be relied upon to substantiate their statements before the impeachment court.

"Kung mga simple bagay, like kailan ka ba nag-travel, kung saan ka nagpunta, hindi mo ito masagot nang maayos, paano ka maniniwala sa testimonya mo?" Madrona said.

Madrona, however, cautioned against immediately interpreting memory lapses as deliberate dishonesty, saying the prosecution must establish whether the witness genuinely failed to remember or intentionally withheld information.

"Of course, memories falter naman talaga. But again, we have to take consideration kung ito may deliberate," he said.

Davao City Assessor Engr. Jaime Adalin, the defense’s first witness faced questions from prosecutors and senator-judges on his travel history, including an alleged all-expenses-paid trip to China in November 2025. He initially said he could not recall the trip before giving further explanations.

Adalin testified that the P6-million property acquired by Duterte's husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, was the same property declared at P10 million in Duterte's SALN. The prosecution, however, questioned the basis of his identification and the difference in the property's stated values.

Foreign currency deposit

The lawyer also raised questions about Carpio's use of his credit card to pay for expenses involving Filipino athletes, saying the transactions must be supported by evidence establishing who ultimately shouldered the costs.

Madrona said there was nothing wrong with helping athletes, but the transactions warranted an explanation because Carpio is married to the Vice President and his financial activities could be relevant to questions surrounding the family's lifestyle.

"Di naman masamang tumulong pero kailangang may paliwanag ito dahil kakabit ka kasi ng pangalawang pangulo," he said.

He stressed that the defense should present documents showing the actual arrangements, including proof of payment and reimbursement, instead of relying solely on witness accounts.

“Kasi kung wala kang ganoon, paano maniniwala sa iyo ang mga hukom sa impeachment court?” he said.

During the 12 November proceedings, defense witness Chadrin Parian, a fellow parent of the Elite Philippines youth basketball team, testified that Carpio paid P256,882.50 for Nike shoes for the players, their parents and guardians in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Another defense witness, lawyer Anel Martin Antero, testified that he reimbursed Carpio 40,000 Japanese yen, or about P16,000, for his share of a P205,007.29 dinner bill at Ginza Inakaya in Tokyo. Antero, however, admitted he had no documentary proof of the payment.