Common sense dictates Sara Duterte’s ‘kill threat’ video is authentic – Diokno

MANILA, Philippines — Common sense should also be applied, not only the technical rules of evidence, in assessing the authenticity of the video showing Vice President Sara Duterte saying she had talked to someone to kill President Ferdinand Marcos Jr, his wife Liza Araneta Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez — in case she herself was killed. House prosecutor Chel Diokno issued this statement on Sunday, recalling what he said during the Saturday News Forum in Dapo Restaurant in Quezon City. “That’s part of the trial, and the other side is questioned during the cross-examination. But what’s needed is for us not to lose our common sense and our own knowledge about that issue,” Diokno said in Filipino. “And we think that what [National Bureau of Investigation Special] Agent [John Mark] Calilung said was very clear, and through our experiences in social media, we know what’s fake and what’s not,” he added. Diokno was asked about the defense’s questioning of Calilung, who testified on the authentication of the videos presented under Article IV of the impeachment complaint. “Actually, in an impeachment case, it’s not only senators who judge. All of us will judge. I remember past impeachment cases, when I would talk to our colleague, those at the store, those who watched [the proceedings], they knew well the testimony, and they had their own views,” Diokno noted. Last Wednesday, the Senate impeachment court began hearing evidence on the Article IV allegation, which involved Duterte’s alleged threats. “What’s good about impeachment is that we can all watch it. It doesn’t go through the narration of a broadcaster or whoever. We ourselves see it. In my view, it’s very clear, very accessible what Agent Calilung said,” Diokno pointed out. The treatment of original and duplicate documents, he added, has evolved under modern rules of evidence, especially as courts deal with recordings, digital files, and electronic records. “Well, first of all, the issue about the original and the copy — rules on evidence have changed. They used to be strict. Let’s say it’s a Xerox copy, as we call it; that’s not readily accepted by court,” Diokno explained. Now, he pointed out, courts no longer automatically reject duplicates when a witness can properly identify them as accurate copies. “But now they have changed that rule. That’s more in line with the international practice, even in America, in various jurisdictions. It’s also the rule and their basis to allow the witness to say that it’s a faithful reproduction. It’s sufficient even though it’s a photocopy,” Diokno said. /atm