Widow’s testimony stricken from massacre trial

MANILA, Philippines - The Quezon City judge handling the Maguindanao massacre trial has stricken from court records the testimony of the widow of a journalist who died in the Nov. 23, 2009 bloodbath.

Regional Trial Court Branch 221 Judge Jocelyn Solis-Reyes issued the order involving the April 2011 testimony of Myrna Reblando, widow of Manila Bulletin reporter Alejandro Reblando Sr., during Thursday’s hearing after the prosecution panel failed to present her for cross-examination by the defense panel.

Myrna reportedly fled the country in fear for her life a month after her initial presentation as a witness in the massacre. She is in Hong Kong and is awaiting the government’s decision on her petition for asylum.

The court earlier gave the prosecution panel until Feb. 28 to recall Myrna to the witness stand and present Reynafe Momay-Castillo, daughter of alleged 58th victim Reynaldo Momay.

Like Myrna, Reynafe is out of the country as she is working in the United States.

In lieu of Myrna’s testimony, the prosecution panel presented Reblando’s son Alejandro Jr., who testified on the authenticity of his judicial affidavit.

The younger Reblando, in his 15-page judicial affidavit, said he and his family suffered actual damages of more than P244,000; unearned income of at least P1.5 million; moral damages of at least P200 million; and exemplary damages of at least P5 million.

The prosecution panel presented Femy Momay – mother of Reynafe and Momay’s widow– as its witness for the civil damages aspect of her husband’s case.

The panel said her testimony complements that of Reynafe, who was the actual complainant in the multiple murder case.

Also presented on Thursday was Cielo Joy Brizuela, the youngest daughter of slain lawyer Connie Jayme-Brizuela, for cross-examination.

Solis-Reyes earlier denied the prosecution panel’s request for Myrna and Reynafe to be presented through video conferencing, saying it would be a burden on the court to install the facilities needed and the court would still be unable to control the physical situation of the witnesses.