18/06/2022
The SUV hit-and-run case just got even more interesting. Joel San Vicente, the father of Jose, was a crony contractor during the Marcos era. In the 1980s, he killed a guy who publicly humiliated him. Then in 1995, he killed another one named Dennis Wong y Chua.
Also this photo is trending on social media. Pretty bad optics of Gen Danao given the circumstances and allowing a press conference and providing airtime to a privileged family.
No attempt to hide of what seems to be the culture of padrino when it comes to the justice system..
PNP’s explanation: PNP officer in charge Lt. Gen. Vicente Danao Jr. said that the police could no longer detain him because the time for that had already lapsed..
Also based on court records, the father of the perp (Joel Sanvicente) once figured in a murder case in Katipunan QC but let off the hook by SC. With Supreme Court and Danao on his side, the Sanvicente crime family is clearly above the law..
Sanvicente is the same man who was accused of killing a man during an altercation infront of a ATM machine of the Far East Bank and Trust Company Branch on Katipunan Avenue, Quezon City.
Evangelista said the victim was shot after delivering ‘karate chops and blows’ on the gunman, who was identified later by police as Sanvicente.
More detailed story:
Supreme Court records showed that one Joel Sanvicente surrendered to the police, bringing with him a .45 caliber pistol that ballistically matched the slugs and shells found in the crime scene at the FEBTC parking lot on June 11, 1995.
Evangelista disclosed that the Joel Sanvicente charged in the killing of businessman Dennis C. Wong and the father of hit-and-run case suspect Jose Antonio Sanvicente, are one and the same person.
The young Sanvicente was presented by the Philippine National Police to the media on Wednesday, over a week after the sports utility vehicle he was allegedly driving ran over Christian Joseph Floralde after being bumped by the car and falling down on the pavement.
Confirmation has been sought from the Philippine National Police but investigators of the Mandaluyong hit-and-run incident have not returned abogado.com.ph’s call.
SC records indicated that elder Sanvicente’s car, a Mercedes Benz, was recovered by police investigators in Barrio Malapit, San Isidro Nueva Ecija, two days after the June 11, 1995 shooting of Wong.
The businessman died from bullet wounds, his body found at the parking space fronting the Far East Bank and Trust Company branch along Katipunan Avenue. An ATM card belonging to a certain Violeta Sanvicente was recovered near Wong’s body.
Despite the evidence presented during trial, the lower court cleared Sanvicente of the charge 16 months into the trial as it granted a demurrer to evidence filed by his lawyers where they assailed the lack of positive identification as Wong’s assailant and the prosecution’s alleged ‘hearsay” evidence.
On July 25, 1997, the Court of Appeals nullified the trial court’s decision. The appellate court noted that the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City committed grave of abuse of discretion in “preventing the prosecution from establishing the due ex*****on and authenticity of Exhibit LL” which they claimed to be the evidence that positively identified Sanvicente as the killer.
Sanvicente’s lawyer contested the CA ruling in a petition for review filed before the Supreme Court.
In a decision written by the Associate Justice Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, the SC First Division granted Sanvicente’s petition and reversed the CA ruling.
In the ruling, the SC magistrates discussed Exhibit LL which the prosecution claimed to be a “confession” of Sanvicente. The prosecution declared the evidence as an “extrajudicial confession” the constituted the strongest evidence of the accused’s guilt.
However, the First Division declared Exhibit LL to be outside the definition of “confession” where the accused acknowledges “in express terms” higuilt.
At best, Exhibit LL could just be an admission that does not acknowledge guilt but merely recognizes some fact or circumstance “which in itself is insufficient to authorize a conviction,” the SC said.
“With the foregoing distinctions in mind, the trial court correctly rejected the prosecution’s motion to ave Exhibit LL further identified ‘in the manner that it wanted,” the court said.
“Aside from converting a subject which squarely falls within the scpe of ‘privileged communication’ it would, more importantly be tantamount to converting the admission into a confession,” it was stressed.
Exhibit LL apparently contained details of the shooting that was communicated by Sanvicente to his counsel, Abogado Leonardo A. Valmonte. It is thus considered a privileged communication which can be disqualified as evidence.
“Moreover, we agree with the trial court that the letter marked as Exhibit LL is hearsay inasmuch as its probative force depends in whole or in part on the competency and credibility of some person other than the witness whom it is sought to produce it,” the Court stated.
The SC First Division also gave weight to fact that Sanvicente surrendered, pointing out that it goes by the biblical maxim that “the wicked flee when no man pursueth but the righteous are as bold as a lion.”
The magistrates said the empty shells fired from the surrendered gun failed to answer the “penultimate quesiton of who actually pulled the trigger of the firearm.”
Read here: https://www.batasph.com/2020/05/digestsanvicente-v-people-of-philippines.html?m=1
Source: abogado.com philstar.com
viral videos, movie clips, news this page is for entertainment purposes only
