COURT OBSERVATION

The cases observed were held last Sep. 23, 2009 as presided by Hon. Judge
Crisologo S. Bitas.

The following cases are heard in the morning:

First heard was a criminal case, People vs. Pedro Cagara Sr. for violation of RA 8353
(Anti-Rape Law of 1997), unfortunately the hearing was ending when we arrived.
However, we had a short glimpse of how speedy the counsels presented the case.
The case was rescheduled.

Second, is a murder case titled People vs. Marcelino Matobato a.k.a. “Esing.” During
trial, the witness was called to the witness stand. The witness cannot understand
English very well however, the court interpreter was adept in translating English
into our vernacular and so the witness was able to narrate about the crime. The
witness also identified the suspect in the courtroom. After which, defense counsel
Suyom asked the witness some clarifying questions. The case was then rescheduled
to be heard the following day for presentation of other evidences. The
detainee/suspect was then brought out of the courtroom by the police officers.

Third case was a civil case titled Rosario Creer vs. Peregrin Dingcong. Here, the
petitioner Rosario was asking for Support Pendente Lite from Mr. Dingcong. The
woman’s child was not acknowledged by the man. But the defendant was absent.
Only his counsel Atty. Laus, was present. The defendant’s counsel was questioning
the disparity of the correct spelling of the name “Peregrin” that appears on the
photocopiy marked exhibit A. Instead of “P” for Peregrin, it appeared as an “F.” He
also asked the woman how many sponsors on the baptism of her child. The
petitoner said she’s not sure about the number of sponsors and just said there were
eight. Defendant counsel again showed a photocopy of exhibit B showing only
“two” sponsors. Petitioner then said that she misplaced the original documents and
she might have photocopied the wrong documents hence, the disparity of the
details. She was somewhat irate of the repetitive questioning and she said she will
find the original documents and have it photocopied and present it to court. After
that, since defendant was absent, the case was rescheduled again for another
hearing. Judge Bitas requested the petitioner to furnish the aforementioned
documents and also asked Atty. Laus to bring his client to court.

The other cases were held in the afternoon.

1. First case was People vs. Alvaro Devaras, Viol. Of RA 9262 Sec. 5(i) and Sec.
5(a), Physical Violence against Women and Children. There was an affidavit of
desistance presented by the prosecutor. A bail bond of 12 thousand pesos
was agreed upon and the case was rescheduled for trial.
2. Second case was a Viol. Of RA 7610, People vs. Eddie Diaz. The suspect was
an old man in his 60’s accused for hitting the victim. The victim was a minor
 around 16. When asked by the counsel, she was able to identify the suspect
in the courtroom. The case was rescheduled to be heard on Jan. 20, 2010.

3. Third was a case of robbery, People vs. Joy Galanza and Cesar Lacaba. Two
suspects were accused of snatching a cellphone. Petitioner was absent. Judge
Bitas advised that petitioner should attend the hearing as rescheduled on
Oct. 26, 2009. Defense counsel also said that one of the suspects was a
minor during the commitment of the offense. The Hon. Judge advised counsel
to prove it on the next hearing. Both accused pleaded not guilty but we
heard that they really snatched the cellphone worth 3,000 pesos. The
accused and the police officers were discussing the matter at the back near
where we’re seated.

4. Fourth case is also a robbery case held against Roberto Duero and Philip
Nielo. Petitioner was absent. Suspects were minors and are under custody of
DSWD. The trial was rescheduled on Nov. 11, 2009 for presentation of other
documents and evidences.

5. Fifth case was People vs. Rene Canonoy in Viol. Of RA 9262 Sec. 5(a) and
Sec. 5(i). Both petitioner and accused were not present. Judge Bitas advised
to summon by virtue of subpoena, the accused. He also advised that the
petitioner to also appear in court. The hearing was reset to Dec. 9,2009 at 2
PM.

6. Cases 6 and 7 were held against one Jerry Creado for Violation of RA 9262
Sec. 5(a) and Violence against Women and their Children respectively.
Petitioner Janice Espino was absent while Jerry, the accused was present. The
accused, seated near us asked if we’re law students and we said yes and we
are here to observe. Accused also admitted to us that he unintentionally
slapped his wife once or twice for nagging at him and also tried to
“discipline” his kids. He was also discussing with the police officers and they
said that men are now to be subservient to their wives because a simple slap
could lead one man to jail. The case was reset to Dec. 9, 2009 and both
petitioner and accused are advised to be present.

7. Next case was Genia P. Delector vs. Alderico Delector. A case of Violence
against Women and Children. Both the petitioner and accused were absent.
There was no return of notification. The case was reset to Nov. 13, 2009 and
Judge Bitas ordered for temporary protection order in favor of the
complainant.

ADDITIONAL CASES:
1. Roberry: Clara Mae Dacuno vs. Robert Señorita and Jay Pakate. The girl,
around 16, a high school student signed voluntarily an affirmation of affidavit
of desistance on the ground that it was a mistake of fact. The court then
ordered dismissal of the case.
2. Attempted Murder: James Homeres vs. Alvin Dellote. Complainant affirmed
affidavit of desistance because he’s no longer interested in pursuing the
case. Defense counsel moved for dismissal of the case as the guilt was not
proven beyond reasonable doubt. The court ordered for immediate release of
the accused.