Trusting Janet Napoles-A A +A
Thursday, May 15, 2014
WITH at least four Janet Napoles lists out there, more of us are crying out for the original list, the affidavit drawn up before Justice Secretary Leila de Lima.
The lists, aside from de Lima's, are those with former senator Ping Lacson and whistleblowers Benhur Luy and Sandra Cam.
Lacson's was given by Janet's husband; Luy's was culled from records the "Inquirer" copied; Cam's was not sourced but it was used by "Daily Tribune" in its news scoop.
The two lists PNoy said he read could be de Lima's and Ping's.
Now the clamor is for the release of the list in de Lima's keeping, because it's from the horse's mouth, so to speak, and it's signed and sworn to. The other lists, lawyers gleefully note, are just scraps of paper with claimed genuineness.
But how trustworthy is Napoles? Before she offered to bare all, she had evaded questions at the Senate Blue Ribbon committee hearing with a slew of "I-don't-know"/"I-don't-remember" excuses and "self-incrimination" dodges.
Whistleblower Benhur Luy and his lawyer cite cases in the past when Napoles said "half-truths to make herself believable and half-lies to muddle the investigation."
There are two piles of facts before prosecutors: Luy's and the other whistleblowers' records and testimonies and Janet's affidavits. They have to sift through them, to see which jibe and which clash and what other evidence supports.
It's a tough and messy job, made more difficult by competing interests, demolition and muddling plots and noisy kibitzers.
The alternative is trusting only Janet. But can an apparent perjurer be trusted?
Published in the Sun.Star Cebu newspaper on May 16, 2014.