WHAT has become apparent following the incident involving Tejero barangay councilor Jessielou Cadungog, his bodyguard William Macaslang Jr., civilian police asset Michael Banua and PO3 Eugene Calumba is that people tend to pass judgment based on their biases and prejudices. Thus the conflicting views on what really happened in Barangay Tejero Monday morning.
Macaslang had claimed that Calumba, with Banua driving the motorcycle they were riding in, pulled a gun from his waistband when they got close to Cadungog’s Toyota FJ Cruiser that he was driving along T. Padilla St. Macaslang shot them. Cadungog said he had gotten off the vehicle when the incident happened.
Police Regional Office (PRO) 7 Chief Debold Sinas, however, presented a different version of the incident: Calumba and Banua, who were merely conducting surveillance operation, were the ones being shot at, resulting in Calumba’s death. Murder and attempted murder cases were thus filed against Cadungog and Macaslang.
Sinas got flak for what he said but to be fair he could make a believable claim out of it. I viewed Macaslang’s narration posted on social media in response to questioning by reporters. I was interested in the allegation that Calumba and Banua targeted Cadungog’s vehicle. I say the weak part was Macaslang’s claim that he shot Calumba when he saw him pull out a gun from his waist.
There would have been no doubt about the intention of Calumba and Banua had they been able to shoot at Cadungog’s vehicle first. Now proof of that intention hinges on Macaslang’s claim that Calumba pulled out a gun from his waist. Or was that really what Calumba was doing at that instance?
In a way, Senior Insp. Jomar Pomarejos of the Waterfront Police Station was correct. “Kun miingon ang drayber nga mibunot, i-prove pa na. Bisag mangalot ka, mibunot man,” he said.
When Macaslang answered questions from reporters, his face was covered with a towel, apparently to hide his appearance. But in this case, the believability of his claim depends on his demeanor. I would have wanted to know if he has military background or was at least trained in handling guns. What he did was a judgment call and it would be good to know his ability in judging delicate situations.
Consider that Cadungog and, in this case Macaslang, were already conscious of the threats to the Tejero barangay councilor’s life. They also knew that the usual mode of attack by assassins had been these gunmen riding a motorcycle in tandem. What played out in T. Padilla seemed to fit into these scheme of things. To the untrained and jittery, that could trigger an overreaction.
The police and the NBI can present testimonies from witnesses to bolster their versions of the story, but these cannot be fully reliable. I think footage from security cameras, if there are any, would be better evidence. Presenting that video would end the tug-of-war on whether Calumba and Banua were really intending to ambush Cadungog’s vehicle.