Wife of "Tongol" indicted for libel

The Cebu City Prosecutor's Office has indicted the widow of a notorious robber, in the libel case filed against her by controversial policeman Adonis Dumpit.

Janice Nodalo, whose husband, Joel alias "Tongol" was killed vigilante-style on June 23, 2005 in a cockpit in Buenavista, Bohol, allegedly said in a radio interview that Dumpit was the one who killed her husband.

Cebu City prosecutor Nicolas Sellon approved the filing of the case before the Regional Trial Court against Janice following the denial of her motion for reconsideration.

Sellon decided to indict Janice of the charge filed November yet last year, upon the recommendation of prosecutor Maria Theresa Agan. However, the filing of the case in court was held in abeyance after the accused asked for reconsideration on the ground that the prosecutor allegedly erred in finding probable cause.

Janice questioned why the anchorman of DYSS, where her alleged libelous statement was aired, was not included in the charge. Janice likewise denied identifying Dumpit as the one who shot and killed her husband during the radio interview.

She claimed good faith in making statements over the radio two hours after her husband was killed by unidentified armed men believe to be vigilantes from Cebu.

Janice, who was interviewed by Allan Majait over DYSS in the evening of June 23, 2005, allegedly tagged Dumpit as perpetrator.

"Si Dumpit gyud ang nagpusil sa akong bana," was Janice's alleged statement during the interview.

Janice's basis for making a conclusion that it was Dumpit was her alleged cellphone conversation with the policeman a few minutes after her husband was shot. Janice allegedly claimed during the interview that she called up Dumpit via cellphone and the later allegedly told her in the dialect, "ikaw ang akong isunod."

She even claims to be very familiar with Dumpit's voice because they are neighbors in Villagonzalo, barangay Tejero.

"Said utterance was a mere expression of opinion by a person with a right to assert the same being the injured party herself,' Janice argued in her affidavit.

But, prosecutor Agan said, while there is no quarrel that Janice is entitled to express her opinion, it should not be a license to malign other people's reputation.

On Janice's claim that she did not identify Dumpit during the radio interview, Agan ruled that there is sufficient evidence to prove that the accused was referring to Dumpit when she made the statements. In fact, she claimed to have been very familiar of his voice because they are neighbors.

Agan said that Janice's argument on the non-inclusion of the radio announcer who interviewed her was misplaced. According to Agan, such argument only applies to libel through publication and not to libel through broadcasting.

Agan explained, unlike in newspaper publication wherein articles for printing go through the mandatory review and editing by the publisher and editor, broadcast interviews, especially live interviews, do not normally go through any screening before it is aired.

The opinion and views expressed by the interviewee is not under the control of the interviewer or other personnel of the broadcast outlet nor does it necessarily reflect their own views to render them liable for airing any defamatory statements made by the interviewee.

"This office is yet to find a law or jurisprudence, which makes the inclusion of, broadcast personnel mandatory in the prosecution of libel charges through broadcasting," Agan said in her resolution denying Janice's motion for reconsideration.

The prosecutor's office has recommended P10,000 bail for Janice's temporary liberty.