Fugitive former Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) chief Gerald Bantag has asked the Court of Appeals to overturn the resolution of the Department of Justice (DOJ) indicting him of two counts of murder, in connection with his involvement in the murder of radio commentator Percival “Percy Lapid” Mabasa and Bilibid inmate June Villamor.
Bantag insisted on his innocence, despite his co-accused previously pleading guilty to lesser offenses over the deaths of Mabasa and Villamor.
In a petition dated July 10 filed through his lawyers from the Santos Law Office, Bantag assailed the Justice Secretary, the Prosecutor General, and the panel of prosecutors of committing grave abuse of discretion for indicting him with murder before 2 courts in Las Piñas and Muntinlupa.
Bantag also challenged the DOJ’s and prosecution panel’s refusal to recuse from handling the murder probes, citing flaws in the prosecution’s theory over the deaths of Lapid and Mabasa.
His former deputy, Ricardo Zulueta, joined him in the petition, represented by lawyer Lauro Gacayan.
Bantag told the CA that the DOJ lacks evidence to link him to the killing of Lapid outside his subdivision in Las Piñas on October 3, 2022.
The DOJ prosecutors claimed that Bantag gave the instructions to kill Lapid to Zulueta, who in turn relayed it to other inmates through a chain: from Zulueta to Denver Mayores; Mayores to Alvin Labra; Labra
to Aldrin Galicia; Galicia to Jun Villamor; Villamor to Christopher Bacoto; and Bacoto to Joel Escorial.
Escorial had confessed to killing Lapid. Labra, Galicia and another inmate Alfie Peñaredonda are commanders of the BCJ Gang, Sputnik Gang and HappyGoLucky Gang, respectively.
Bantag noted that only Escorial mentioned him by name as the person whom Villamor allegedly identified as the mastermind behind Lapid’s killing while Mayores, Labra and Galicia, who claimed to have met with Zulueta, only referred to “itaas” and “tanda.”
According to the accused, the chain is “inherently defective” for its “potential for distortion, misinterpretation, or misinformation at each step of the chain.”
“Consider that based on the evidence it was only the last person, Escorial, who identified the petitioner. All the others simply mentioned references to the petitioner. This type of communication process is often referred to as a ‘rumor mill’ or ‘hearsay chain,’ is inherently unreliable and susceptible to errors, biases, and deliberate manipulation,” Bantag said, in his petition.
“In this chain of communication, the original alleged source of the order is distant from the final recipient. As a result, there is no clear and direct link between the alleged order and the person who supposedly issued it. Each person in the chain may unintentionally or intentionally alter the message, misunderstand its meaning, or misremember the details. This can lead to a distortion of the original order, making it unreliable as evidence,” he added.
According to Bantag, Escorial claimed he had already been hired to kill Lapid as early as September 5, 2022 but according to the gang leaders, they only met with Zulueta for the order to kill the broadcaster on the second week of September.
Bantag said Escorial never mentioned him in his initial extrajudicial confession but only in his subsequent affidavit, which the former BuCor chief claimed could have been influenced by the prosecution’s promise to discharge him as state witness.
“If the petitioner’s involvement was truly significant and undeniable, it would be expected that Escorial would have mentioned the petitioner’s name from the outset. The timing of his decision to implicate the petitioner after being assured of becoming a State Witness raised questions about his motives and the potential influence of external factors on his testimony,” he said.
“Escorial’s testimony can be seen as a mere afterthought and should be outright rejected. It is incredible to believe that he would have forgotten the petitioner’s alleged involvement, considering that the petitioner would be the most significant and prominent figure in the entire scenario of Percival Mabasa’s killing. The petitioner’s name and alleged participation could not have been an insignificant or easily forgettable detail,” he added.
Bantag said that Escorial’s testimony should be treated as hearsay and inadmissible as evidence, not as a dying declaration, which is an exception to the hearsay rule.
“[O]n 16 October 2022, when he ‘heard’ the supposed incriminating information from Villamor, the latter was not dying or under consciousness of an impending death. This said, the alleged declaration was not a dying declaration; hence, it does not constitute as an exception to the hearsay rule thus inadmissible in evidence,” he said.
“[T]he alleged dying declaration of Villamor that the petitioner ordered the killing of Percival Mabasa did not have to do with the circumstances of the death of the declarant (Villamor) — but the death of another, viz., Percival Mabasa; hence it is not a dying declaration under the Rules on Evidence,” he added.
Bantag cited the prosecution panel’s admission that there was no direct evidence linking him to Lapid’s killing and refuted their finding that there were sufficient circumstantial evidence against him.
“The circumstantial evidence must exclude the possibility that some other person has committed the crime,” he said, arguing that Lapid’s exposé on Bantag’s supposed luxurious lifestyle pales in comparison to Lapid’s other exposés against Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla and several other personalities.
It was Remulla who identified Bantag as the mastermind in the Lapid killing, citing Lapid’s exposé and the testimony of Villamor’s sister who claimed to know about Bantag’s involvement through a exchange of messages with his brother.
However, Bantag challenged the sister’s account, claiming she was not really Villamor’s sister but the relative of another inmate, Jun Globa Villamor, who is different from Cristito Palana Villamor.
He pointed out the screenshot of the messages show timestamps of 12:46 and 12:47 while the sister said the messages were sent at 11:59am on October 18, the day Villamor died.
Bantag also assailed the jurisdiction of the DOJ and the panel of prosecutors, claiming it is the Office of the Ombudsman which should have conducted the probe since it is the Sandiganbayan which has jurisdiction over him, as a public official.
The Ombudsman investigates complaints which are later filed before the Sandiganbayan.
Bantag noted his post had a salary grade 30 level, higher than the Sandiganbayan’s threshold of salary grade 27 and up.
He also said there was an “intimate connection” between the offense charged and the his office, making it fall under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
The prosecutors had ruled that murder is not office specific and can be committed without regard to the discharge of office functions.
“Any observer, even a lay person for that matter, could conclude based on the allegations in the complaint that the offenses allegedly committed by petitioner who is a public official was done in relation and could not have been committed without the use of the authority of the public office he was holding,” Bantag said.
Bantag and Zulueta, who remain at large despite outstanding warrants of arrest from a Las Piñas and a Muntinlupa court, executed their affidavits in Baguio City on July 10.
In March, a DOJ panel of prosecutors indicted Bantag, Zulueta and several others for 2 counts of murder.