Friday, August 10, 2007
Bodega owner in shabu lab case: Clear me
ONE of the co-accused in the Mandaue shabu laboratory case has asked the court to review the evidence so far introduced against him and, after finding it insufficient, to clear him of all charges immediately.
Businessman Richard Ong, through counsels Bernardito Florido, Joan Sarausos-Largo and Haide Acuña, made the plea in a 13-page demurrer to evidence that has now been submitted for Regional Trial Court (RTC) Judge Marilyn Yap’s resolution.
That, after the prosecution failed to file on time an opposition to Ong’s motion for leave of court to file the demurrer.
In the demurrer, the businessman argued the 16 items of documentary evidence and the testimony of the different police witnesses presented by the prosecution have not been enough to show that he conspired with the other respondents to commit the crime charged.
“Not one of these witnesses identified accused Ong,” the businessman said.
Ong is charged together with businessman Andy Ng as conspirators in the operation of the shabu laboratory that the police discovered and closed last Sept. 24, 2004 following an operation they called Red Crystalline.
Ong and Ng supposedly provided the warehouse that the other accused allegedly turned into a shabu manufacturing plant. The other accused are Joseph Yu, Hung Chin Chang, Siew Kin Weng, Liew Kam Song, Lin Li Ku, Bao Xia Fu, Fu Tiao Yi, Tao Fei, Liu Bo, Allan Yap Garcia, Joseph Lopez and other John Does.
The prosecution obtained and presented in court the lease contract for the warehouse. The contract bore Ong and Ng’s signatures as lessors, with one Nicky Lopez as lessee.
Sec. 26 of Republic Act 9165 penalizes the conspiracy to manufacture dangerous drugs.
But Ong said the prosecution failed to establish that Ong knew about what was going on or that he knowingly tolerated it.
Ong used the same argument when he filed a motion for bail that the court, after ruling that the evidence against him wasn’t strong, granted last April 12, 2005.
“In this case, there is clearly no proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt as there is even no strong evidence of guilt against accused Ong,” the demurrer read.
According to Ong, key prosecution witnesses like Police Senior Supt. Amado Marquez of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) and the three other members of Red Crystalline, all of whom testified to have conducted 24-hour surveillance on the warehouse, never mentioned seeing Ong in the area.
“The prosecution panel likewise presented the testimonies of witnesses Hung Chin Chang, alias Simon Lao, and Tamadoni Morteza, both of whom are insiders who gave an intimate account of the crime from its inception to its culmination. (But) neither Hung nor Morteza pointed to accused Ong as the drug syndicate’s local contact,” the demurrer read.
“In fact, Morteza, who helped procure the warehouse, went on to refer to a certain local contact he called Amigo and the Far Eastern Drug Company but never implicated Richard Ong,” it added.
So far, according to the businessman, the only evidence against him are those already discussed during the bail hearing.
“If the prosecution’s evidence (was) not even enough to keep accused Ong in detention for the duration of the trial, then the same evidence would be insufficient to convict Ong beyond reasonable doubt,” his lawyers argued.
“In criminal procedure, as well as in constitutional law, mere accusation is not synonymous with guilt… No matter how strong it may be, suspicion or suspicious circumstances are not a substitute for proof and evidence,” it added. (KNR)
For Bisaya stories from Cebu. Click here. (August 10, 2007 issue)
Write letter to the editor.Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board.Click here.
|
