As Christmas approaches, another case worth revisiting for history vs. gossip is the Vizconde Massacre. I watched Crime Investigation Asia uploaded on YouTube. I wrote about the documentary Give Up Tomorrow--a documentary that explores the irregularities while pursuing justice for the late Chiong sisters, Jacqueline Jimenea Chiong and Marijoy Jimenea Chiong. I feel compelled to write about the Vizconde Massacre. For more than 10 years, I used to believe that Hubert Jeffry Pagaspas Webb, son of Freddie Webb, was guilty. It turns out that according to Crime Investigation Asia--it was really a trial by gossip. In my case, I want to call it a trial of Trust Me Bro.
I still read comments about how footage of Hubert in the States could've been "easily tampered". Yet, those who comment haven't presented the evidence. I guess if I asked for their evidence, they'll just say, "Trust me bro!" Granted, photo editing was still in its infancy back then so how could anybody who claimed it was tampered with have even a single proof for that claim Well, that's what the documentary about the Vizconde Massacre revealed. A lot of evidence that pointed to Hubert's innocence was somehow, I dare believe, conveniently ignored. Until now, I still feel something was not right concerning the Vizconde Massacre.
Ramon Tulfo wrote for the Inquirer an article called "A lesson in forgiveness". I would agree that the judge herself, Amelita G. Tolentino, was biased. The article mentioned that Tolentino herself was eyeing a position in the Court of Appeals. Did that desire, if ever, blind the judge? Did the judge have some motive? I can't be too sure but while watching the documentary--I think I would've probably slapped the judge, been sent to jail, and gotten de-barred if I was among Hubert's lead counsel! I even want to say that the judge herself is very maldita which means mean-spirited woman.
Why I felt it was a trial of "Trust Me Bro"
The timeline of the Vizconde Massacre would be as follows. June 29-30, 1991, was when the crime happened. There were also movies such as The Vizconde Massacre Story followed up by The Untold Story: Vizconde Massacre II May The Lord Be With Us. These were screened during the trial. I find this all to be unethical, especially when in 1995, the new suspect, Jessica Alfaro (who frequently wore shades for some reason) appeared. It was when things started to fall into place.
The documentary revealed 142 pieces of evidence ignored. We have Tolentino herself who said that it's not the amount but the quality. Yet, Crime Investigation Asia surely had presented the proof that Tolentino ignored. Tolentino had condemned herself in that statement. Was Tolentino insinuating that Jessica herself was more reliable than the evidence she probably just rejected as an inconvenience? Isn't it protocol to examine every piece of evidence? I guess that's why there was this article from The Philippine Star called "The Tolentino Blunder". It was written nine years before Hubert got acquitted for a crime he could've never committed. It was because Hubert was in America when it all happened.
Why are Jessica's statements listened to? I guess it's because of how intriguing the story was. Her story was probably very fascinating. Yet, there were several inconsistencies that Crime Investigation Asia's documentary pointed out. I guess people were more interested in hearing what Jessica had to say because it sounded more interesting. In the case of the late Lauro Vizconde, here's a man who's desperate to find out who did the crime. It's sad, really, that Vizconde would die without knowing who was responsible for the crime. That's what Hubert later said that the real murderers must be found! Vizconde still believes the lies Jessica uttered in court. I guess it's because desperation caused him to believe it. I'm sickened at how Jessica's probably still enjoying life out there. Though, Jessica will sooner or later get what's coming to her.
Why were the 142 pieces of evidence ignored? I guess it's because, facts, unlike gossip, can be very boring. For some students, history is a very boring lesson. People would rather gossip nonsense than study for a history exam. If the judge was in doubt then why not have them examined? How could Tolentino just say that it may have been tampered with if she didn't have it examined? I guess that's why former Philippine justice secretary, Vitaliano N. Aguirre II, walked out. At first, I thought it was an act of disrespect like he did during the impeachment trial of the late Renato Corona. It turns out that Hubert was truly a victim of public outcry and a biased judge as the documentary presented. Any good judge would have complied with protocol. Why not have all 142 pieces of evidence examined before making a verdict? It seemed that the judge pre-judged the case if that's the case!
The outrage can be there. Hubert was really in the States all along when the crime happened. Yet, we have a very biased judge who contradicted herself. We have a man who did nothing wrong arrested and wrongfully arrested for 15 years. I wonder if his wife, whom he met in jail, was also wrongfully accused? I believe that the rest of the people with Hubert were nothing more than fall guys. I'm glad Hubert is out of jail. Yet, the fight isn't over. One must question where are the real killers. One must question why was this gross injustice allowed to happen?
When Hubert later gets involved in the premiere of a similar case
Later on, Hubert appeared in the 2012 premiere of Give Up Tomorrow. It's because, like the Vizconde Case, the real murderers of Jacqueline and Marijoy were never found. It turns out that Juan Francisco Gonzales Larranaga aka Paco was in Quezon City in Manila during the night of the crime. It shocked me to no end to learn that Paco was innocent of that crime. Sure, Paco did have some previous cases such as the fight in the parking lot. Yet, nothing changes the fact that Paco and seven others were wrongfully arrested, one of them (according to the documentary) was actually tortured, and it wasn't a fair trial. Hubert knows what it's like to be wrongfully accused.
Hubert had his Christmas gift on December 10, 2010. I'm glad that Hubert is among others who are speaking against being wrongfully accused. It's no wonder why cries for the abolition of the death penalty are there. I may be for the death penalty but I agree that wrongful executions can happen. I agree with some of those who want it abolished because the wrong people can get executed as well. The problem is with the judicial system which is why I'm not in a hurry to get the death penalty back. Though, I want to see it restored and reserved only for wicked authority figures who misuse the law. I'm glad Hubert and the others wrongfully accused were released. Now, one must wonder who masterminded their frame-up? Where are the real killers now? I could dare say that trial by Trust Me Bro may have protected the real perpetrators all this while.
Unfortunately, some people still ignore the cold-hard facts. The facts stated that Hubert was in the States when the crime happened. Yet, some people still side with the inconsistency of Jessica's testimony. Some still uphold that Tolentino wasn't a biased judge. This case should be a call against trial by Trust Me Bro.