THE Regional Trial Court (RTC) issued a warrant of arrest against SPO1 Adonis Dumpit for Friday, upholding the validity of the non-bailable murder case against him and declaring that he can be taken into custody “on any day and anytime of the day or night.”
Copies of the warrant, a clerk at the 6th branch of the RTC in Cebu City yesterday confirmed, have already been sent to the Cebu City Police Office for service; a fact that has convinced National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) 7 agents that Dumpit already knows of the warrant’s existence.
“We have secured a copy and we intend to give it to Dumpit’s commanding officer (today) so he can voluntarily give himself up,” said NBI Special Investigator Arnel Pura, the agent who, in 2005, lodged the complaint which resulted in Dumpit’s indictment.
Omnibus order
The warrant followed RTC Judge Ester Veloso’s Jan. 7, 2010 Omnibus Order canceling an earlier ruling that granted Dumpit’s motion to get the Office of the Ombudsman for the Military and Other Law Enforcement Offices (Moleo) to reinvestigate the charge against him.
A day after the order was issued, however, somebody furnished Veloso’s court an “unofficial” copy of an Aug. 12, 2009 resolution from the Moleo indicating that the agency has reinvestigated the charge and is recommending that the case be downgraded from murder to homicide.
The murder case is pursuant to Dumpit’s fatal Dec. 14, 2004 shooting of Ronron Go, 17, a suspected robber.
According to the victim’s mother, Janeth Badana, it was a case of mistaken identity.
The policeman, who has been accused of the unnecessary use of force in the past, has denied committing murder, saying he was only defending himself because he was shot at first in what he described as an encounter.
The NBI investigated the shooting and, taking into consideration forensic evidence and witness statements vis-à-vis Dumpit’s counter-affidavit, recommended that the policeman be charged.
Four years and several months after the killing, the Moleo acted on the recommendation and, in April last year, had the Office of the Cebu City Prosecutor charge Dumpit before the RTC with a non-bailable murder case.
The case got raffled off to Judge Bienvenido Saniel and Dumpit quickly filed a motion for reinvestigation and asked that his warrant be withheld pending its resolution. Saniel inhibited from the case in July of the same year but not before granting the motion for reinvestigation, over the prosecution’s objections.
Valid
The issue of Dumpit’s arrest went pending from then on.
Private prosecutor Rizalina Zozobrado said the prosecution has not been furnished a copy of the Moleo’s Aug. 12, 2009 resolution. Nevertheless, she said it has no bearing on Judge Veloso’s omnibus order or on the Jan. 8, 2010 warrant of arrest.
“The warrant is still valid and enforceable,” she maintained in an interview at the NBI headquarters.
Moreover, Zozobrado stressed, the resolution is only recommendatory because “the case is already in court” and that the decision of what to do next rests solely on Judge Veloso, who won’t be acting on it because the court “has not yet been served with an official copy.”
Still, Zozobrado revealed, they will seek a reconsideration of the Moleo resolution and get it expunged from the records.
“The case is no longer in the jurisdiction of the Moleo and the Office of the Special Prosecutor has already manifested its position on the murder case. This resolution of the Moleo is contradictory,” she said.
So?
Badana, in a separate interview, said a media practitioner told her that it was Assistant Cebu City Prosecutor Mary Ann Castro who released copies of the Moleo resolution.
“If this is true, what is her business in doing so when the Ombudsman (Moleo) has not even given a copy to the court?” she said in Bisaya.
“I’m the resident prosecutor of Branch 6. So?” Castro said.
She explained that she was given a copy by defense lawyer Pedro Leslie Salva, who may have also given other people copies.
Castro, who has been described as a friend of the policeman, is assigned to RTC Branch 6, alternating with State Prosecutor Llena Ipong-Avila.
However, neither she nor Ipong are taking part in the case, which is jointly being prosecuted by Ombudsman Prosecutor Alfred Oguis and with Zozobrado as private prosecutor, Badana explained.
In resolving to proceed with the murder case against Dumpit, Veloso said Dumpit’s claim that he was not given the chance to present his side in the preliminary investigation “is devoid of factual merit.”
“The failure of the accused Dumpit to file his counter-affidavit despite notice constitutes a waiver of his right to preliminary investigation,” Veloso ruled.
Counter
“The prosecution has amply proven that he did receive the order for him to submit his counter-affidavit as certified to by the Office of the Postmaster. The mere denial of PO2 Abay (a witness for Dumpit) cannot overwhelm the presumption that the postman regularly performed his official functions,” Veloso stressed.
Likewise, the court pointed out, the absence of a corresponding entry in the policeman’s log does not prove that he wasn’t’ served a copy of the order as it could also be argued that it just wasn’t recorded.
Moreover, Veloso also pointed out, Dumpit submitted his counter-affidavit to the NBI when it investigated the incident first and the Office of the Ombudsman took the counter-affidavit into account when it resolved to file the murder charges.
Special Investigator Pura, in an interview yesterday, said they will coordinate with the head of the PNP’s Firearms Explosives Security Agencies and Guards Supervisory Section (Fesagss) in the region, where Dumpit is now assigned, to get the policeman to surrender.
“We hope that the head of Fesagss will order him to yield in compliance with a lawful order of the court,” Pura said.
Chance
Meanwhile, Julius Java, special prosecution officer II of Moleo, said based on circumstances, Dumpit did not have “the luxury of time to deliberate or contemplate” the method of killing the victim.
“For treachery to be appreciated there must not be even the slightest provocation on the part of the victim,” said Java.
He said the shootout between Dumpit’s team and the victim’s group was a “chance encounter.”
“Chance encounters, impulse killing or crimes committed at the spur of the moment or those that were preceded by heated altercations are generally not attended by treachery for lack of opportunity (of Dumpit) to deliberately employ a treacherous mode of attack,” his ordered read.
Java said the shooting was “clearly a spur of the moment or impulsive decision” of Dumpit on the victim’s group.
“Its essence lies in the attack which comes without warning, and is swift, deliberate and unexpected, and affords the hapless, unarmed and unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or to escape,” he added. (KNR With GMD)