Monday, February 23, 2004
Ombud finds ‘gaps’ in Sarcol probe
THE anti-graft office wants to question the Cebu City Police Office (CCPO) homicide section investigators who looked into the killing of PO3 Michael Sarcol and whose report the suspect is now using to bolster his defense.
Ombudsman Prosecutor Estela Alma Singco said the office is also wondering why the Cebu City-based PNP Crime Laboratory failed to examine the gun taken from suspected snatcher Omar Patiño to see if it had recently been fired.
SPO4 Juanito Pajantoy has been charged with the killing of Sarcol who, according to the National Bureau of Investigation 7, died by “friendly fire.”
Sarcol, who had served as the security detail of Thelma Chiong while the Chiong case was still pending, was running after Patiño, who had just snatched somebody’s bag, when he was shot dead last July 15, 2003.
The Cebu City Police Office’s version of the incident was that it was Patiño who shot Sarcol while trying to elude arrest. Patiño was also shot dead.
Friendly fire?
The NBI’s Task Force Sarcol took over the investigation and, in a report, tagged Pajantoy for Sarcol’s death.
The NBI subsequently filed a case against him before the Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas, which endorsed the case to the military anti-graft office.
The Office of the Ombudsman-Military, however, remanded the case to the Visayas anti-graft office last week for clarifi-catory hearing.
Singco said she wants to summon Homicide Section investigators, headed by SPO4 Mario Monilar, to find out why the NBI and their versions of the incident varied greatly from each other.
During the hearing, Pajantoy, who is represented by lawyer Clarence Paul Oaminal, said they are basing their defense on the sketch made by the CCPO Scene of the Crime Operations (Soco).
Pajantoy had said he couldn’t have shot Sarcol, who was hit in the back because, based on the Soco sketch, they were only a couple of feet parallel with each other and both facing Patiño.
He said it was Patiño who shot Sarcol and that he, upon seeing Sarcol hit, returned Patiño’s fire, killing him.
The NBI’s findings, however, show that Patiño, at the time of Sarcol’s death, was in the middle of Pajantoy and Sarcol.
Sarcol, according to NBI investigators, was trying to cut Patiño off from his intended route of escape when Pajantoy fired and hit Sarcol instead.
The presence of gunpowder nitrates on Patiño’s hand indicates that he too fired a gun, probably at Sarcol who was trying to maneuver from behind him, but missed.
Pajantoy said he recovered a gun from Patiño but the gun, according to the Ombudsman-Military, was never checked for bore residues to find out if it’s the same gun that he allegedly fired at Sarcol. KNR
(February 23, 2004 issue)
Write letter to the editor.Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board.Click here. |
