Napoles' counsel chided over tardiness, failure to present witness

MANILA, Philippines - The lawyer of businesswoman Janet Lim Napoles who is also facing a case of serious illegal detention filed against her by pork barrel scam whistleblower Benhur Luy  earned  the ire of Makati City Regional Trial Court Branch 150 Judge Elmo Alameda for arriving almost one hour late for the continuation of the hearing Tuesday morning.

The hearing was scheduled for 9:30 a.m., but lawyer Bruce Rivera arrived at 10:30 a.m. Rivera was supposed to present evidence and witnesses for the defense after the prosecution rested its case last July 1.

Immediately after arriving at the courtroom, Rivera profusely apologized to Alameda and the panel of prosecutors led by Makati Assistant Senior Prosecutor Christopher Garvida. The prosecutors were recalled back to the courtroom after Rivera arrived.

In explaining his tardiness for the hearing, Rivera said he “lost himself” (nawala sa sarili) after arriving early Tuesday from Davao City where he attended another hearing.

“The prosecutors appeared before the court while Attorney Bruce Rivera failed to appear. Records show that he signed the minutes of the proceeding last July 1, notifying him of the presentation of his evidence to this court. His failure to appear unduly delayed the proceedings,” said Alameda who also threatened to cite Rivera for contempt.

Rivera explained to Alameda that he had just arrived from Davao City on a delayed flight and thought that the hearing was scheduled for 10:30 a.m.

“Your honor, admittedly, there’s no iota of reason that I can give. I really thought it was 10:30 your honor. I just arrived from Davao after a delayed flight. I just had two hours of sleep and then when I woke up at around 8:30 I was thinking it was a 10:30 hearing. I left the house at 9:15 am and I was even texting the stenographer asking where am I and I said, isn’t it a 10:30 hearing?” said Rivera.

“I really thought that it was a 10:30 a.m. hearing. If stupidity is contemptible, I plead guilty your honor,” Rivera added.

Alameda accepted Rivera’s excuse saying that it was an “honest oversight.” Alameda added that the court should have also provided Rivera with a separate order stating that he is to present his evidence and witnesses at 9:30 a.m.

“Had there been a separate order, I would have not accepted your reason,” said Alameda.

Rivera also learned  on Tuesday that his motion  to  file  demurrer  to  evidence  was also junked by the court despite the order being issued last July 31.

Under the Rules of Court, after the prosecution rests its case, the accused may file a demurrer to evidence with leave or without leave of court or present his evidence unless he waives the same. A demurrer to evidence is a motion filed by the defense to dismiss the case after the prosecution rests on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence of the prosecution.

“As there is now an order dismissing the motion, there is no more reason for you not to present your witnesses,” said Alameda.

Rivera then argued that he was not ready to present his witnesses and evidence as he did not personally receive the court’s order dismissing his motion to file demurrer to evidence.

Makati Assistant Senior Prosecutor Christopher Garvida then chided Rivera for his failure  to present a single witness.

“The prosecution rested its case as early as July 1. The defense had a month to prepare. They should have presumed that the motion they filed is to be granted or denied. As lawyers we should be professional enough to be ready when we are required to be ready,” he said.

Alameda then ordered Rivera to be ready with his witnesses when the hearing resumes again on August 19 at 9:30 a.m.

Rivera was also ordered by the court to submit before the hearing, the names of the first five witnesses to be presented.

Napoles’ previous lawyer, Alfredo Villamor,  had told the court that he would be presenting 18 witnesses.

Rivera then asked the court to be allowed five days to submit the names of the first five witnesses to be presented on the next hearing.

Alameda also told Rivera that it would be up to him if he still wants to present the 18 witnesses earlier identified by Villamor.

“It is up to you if you would want to follow the list of witnesses earlier submitted by the previous counsel,” said Alameda.

Villamor earlier told the court the defense will be presenting 18 witnesses, mostly priests from the retreat house in Magallanes Village in Makati reportedly owned by Napoles and where  Luy was supposedly detained.

To be presented as witnesses for the defense said Villamor are Patricio Asoy, William Lim, Msgr. Ramirez, Fr. Paul Yang, Fr. Peter Guo, Fr. Joseph Gao, Fr. John Ma, Fr. Paul Dong, Abelardo Gernale, Jethron Bande, Madylon Habana, Ana Marie Lim, Fernando Masayon, Feliciano Alcantara, Expedito Rosales, Peter John Castillo, Napoles herself and her brother and co-accused Reynald Lim.

During Napoles' last bail petition hearing last October 30, the defense panel presented as witness Fr. Peter Edward Lavin.

Lavin, the defense panel's sole witness, was presented to prove the defense panel's argument  Luy was not illegally detained but had only spent a spiritual retreat at a house in Magallanes Village reportedly owned by Napoles.