Dating opinion pieces ni NBI Dir. Melvin Matibag, hinalungkat ng Defense team ni VP Sara | GMA News

[00:00:00]Now I I'll show you one last graphic and then I'll ask you a couple of questions thereafter.

[00:00:07]Can we show the the graphic? All right.

[00:00:11]So um it this is uh from the daily tribune.

[00:00:17]>> Your honor, please.

[00:00:19]>> No question yet, your honor.

[00:00:21]>> Council finish with this question and then the the lead prosecutor may make her objection.

[00:00:26]>> All right. Uh this is from the daily tribune. Okay. And this is the public entitled public trust rating. I'll just focus on the green, not the red. No, but uh vice president Sarah Duterte. It says there 57%.

[00:00:43]And this was conducted uh by the social weather stations SWS uh survey. Okay. Now um my question to you is this. You mentioned that you have an ongoing investigation.

[00:00:58]Do materials like this uh in so far as how Filipino people view or trust VP Sara have an effect in your investigation?

[00:01:08]>> Objection.

[00:01:08]>> For the witness answers, lead prosecutors recognized for objection.

[00:01:12]What is the basis of the objection?

[00:01:13]>> Your honor, the defense is showing a picture of the president and the vice president with a certain rating at the bottom. This has no relevance at all, your honor, with respect to the subject matter of this impeachment trial.

[00:01:29]>> I think he has >> and we are objecting to the presentation of this picture, your honor.

[00:01:34]>> I think it has just a short rejoiner.

[00:01:36]>> Kindly allow the lead prosecutor. Are you done? Um ma'am.

[00:01:39]>> Yes, your honor.

[00:01:40]>> Just a short rejoiner, your honor. Um >> attorney Lu, >> the witness mentioned the term betrayal of public trust and we can run the TSN back. Uh your honor, of course, we're allowed. This is cross-examination. and we're allowed to present controverting evidence to that statement.

[00:01:56]>> Um the chair will allow um the witness to answer despite that there is no date when this survey was taken. Um kindly answer if you um know. Um director >> gladly Mr. Presiding officer po survey and all of us know or for the information of the public a survey is just a snapshot of something. It doesn't necessarily follow.

[00:02:32]We cannot be swayed by public opinion.

[00:02:49]NBI.

[00:02:50]>> So the short answer to my question is no, it doesn't affect.

[00:02:53]>> No, it will not.

[00:02:54]>> Okay. Uh I I mentioned Daily Tribune. Uh you write editorials for the Daily Tribune, correct?

[00:03:01]>> Tama po. Long time ago.

[00:03:02]>> Long time ago. And in 2024, you wrote at least three editorials about VP Sara. Is that Can you recall Mari poin vice president?

[00:03:12]>> I'm showing you uh this. No, not that one. The the editorials. All right. From the daily tribune and uh we have copies uh hard copies that you can uh refer to.

[00:03:24]But it says here, director Belvin Matiba. Do you confirm that it is you who authored these editorials?

[00:03:29]>> Yes.

[00:03:30]>> All right. Now, um I'm showing you the first one entitled in Daisara the Bratinella dated September 12, 2024. Do you confirm that you wrote this editorial?

[00:03:40]>> That's correct in my opinion column.

[00:03:42]>> All right. And you also wrote the Bratinella is a flat spare tire dated October 24, 2024. Do you confirm this?

[00:03:51]>> Yes.

[00:03:51]>> All right. And you also wrote uh Bratinella Sara and her bad habit habits dated November 7, 2024.

[00:04:01]Uh do you confirm this?

[00:04:03]>> Yes.

[00:04:04]>> And in this editorials you shared your opinions against VPs. Is that correct?

[00:04:10]Well, that is not by original.

[00:04:25]All right. So, um my only question is before you testified today, there were already instances in the past that you shared your public opinions against VP.

[00:04:35]>> Well, that is a opinion. All right.

[00:04:40]Okay. In fact, let me read one line from your editorial.

[00:04:45]It says there as in Daisara is being unmasked in the legislative inquiries and by her own mouth as an illbred bratinella her public trust crumbles. Do you confirm that you included this statement in your editorial?

[00:05:04]>> All right. And despite this position and the recent surveys uh show that VP Sara was even even gained positive trust rating as shown earlier positive 57. Do you confirm this?

[00:05:21]>> Well again I'm saying that is my opinion as an opinion writer.

[00:05:26]>> All right. Now despite this positive trust rating by VP Sara, do you still maintain that and I quote her public trust crumbles?

[00:05:35]>> Well director director. All right, one last question on this before I let this point go. Um, so considering the positive trust rating of VP Sara, can one really say that she betrayed public trust?

[00:06:06]>> Speculative, your honor, >> can we get a ruling?

[00:06:10]>> Witness is knowledgeable enough to answer. He can handle himself. Director, give me my answer.

[00:06:15]And again I'm saying and survey a survey is just a snapshot of what's happening. It doesn't necessarily follow.

[00:06:44]Your honor, uh at this point, your honor, um the defense is constrained to ask for a continuence and we have uh our grounds therefore. Number one, your honor, um the testimony of director Batibbag earlier uh consisted of a lot of uh new topics and um it is uh we believe that it is the right of uh the respondent to intelligently cross-examine him on those topics. Again, your honor, those topics are not included in the articles of impeachment and are considered new. In fact, your honor, as earlier stated, we feel like we feel that uh these two top topics are a violation of uh the respondent's right to be promptly and fully uh apprised of the exact charges against her. So, we will need time, your honor, to go through those new materials in the new points. Um secondly, your honor, uh during direct examination, uh a document, a 100page document was introduced and allowed by this court.

[00:07:51]Um, and that document is unsigned and un notorized. And we feel like for us to intelligently cross-examine the witness on this document that uh he um he mentioned, uh we we we need that there's a need uh we feel that there's a need for a continuence. Your honor, >> what does the lead prosecutor say?

[00:08:11]>> With all due respect, your honor, we object to the motion for continuance of the defense. The the defense already started and propounded a lot of cross-examination questions to the witness and the witness is simply answering completely accurately the questions which are being raised and propounded to him. We do not understand your honor.