Skip to main content

Case Unclosed on the Chiong Sisters


Apology: I'm sorry that the video above is in Tagalog, so sorry in advance to non-Filipino readers.

As long as an injustice happens, nobody should shut up about a case unclosed. Like the Vizconde Massacre case, nobody really knows who did the crime. With Davidson Rusia's story put into question, one must wonder what really happened in detail. I still believe that the body found in Carcar is really Marijoy Jimenea Chiong. However, the claim that the sperm of the main suspect, Francisco Juan "Paco" G. Larrañaga, and the rest weren't found, makes you wonder who did the autopsy. In my case, the body found in Carcar wasn't formally identified until fingerprints were taken by the police. Nobody claimed the body of the woman found in Carcar. 

It's easy to say that Give Up Tomorrow is biased because the maker of the video, is a "relative" of Paco (read here). However, Marty Syjuco is the brother of the brother-in-law of Paco. The brother of one's brother-in-law doesn't make the two, legally related. Marty is the brother-in-law of Mimi Larrañaga-Syjuco, not Paco's brother-in-law. 

A diagram found on Facebook, apparently owned by
the late Miguel "Juan" Del Gallego y Ripoll

This really puts a lot into question. I believe that Josman Azmar may have courted the presumed late Jacqueline Jimenea Chiong. However, Paco and others admitted that he wasn't a suitor of Marijoy at all. Maybe, the father of the Uy brothers personally knew the Chiong parents. I still refuse to believe what he said about that long-distance call from Canada. That's unless the daughter mentioned was actually the youngest, Debbie Jane Jimenea Chiong-Sia. Paco and Josman knew each other, which may explain why Paco was the next possible suspect. The Uy brothers have met Rowan Adlawan and knew the star witness Davidson. Davidson wasn't legally allowed to testify so why did he testify? The documentary revealed that Davidson was actually tortured. Rowen said in an interview that Davidson was tortured into lying. Apparently, Rowen knew Davidson. However, Rowen was barely known by the first two suspects. I must even question how Alberto Caño and Ariel Balansag got arrested if they apparently never knew the other six suspects? My only speculation is that both Alberto and Ariel may have worked for the Aznars, which may have made them very susceptible to wrongful arrest. 


Rewatching the video above, there are a lot of things that just don't make any sense. Atty. Florencio O. Villarin was later barred from testifying. Villarin went to the workplace of Jacqueline to find out anything. Villarin said that the owner of the boardinghouse said the place was too small. The owner of the video is shown above. Take a look at the place. It's really very small to fit a sex party with eight men and two rape victims. The rooms would be too small also to split between the two groups.

This is a very far cry from what was shown in the film Animal (2004). It's an exploitation film (and viewer's discretion is advised) that was loosely based on the Chiong case. The late John Regala played Jaco Lozano--a parody of Paco. The late Federico Natividad Jr. suffered a lawsuit from the Chiong family (read here). Was it possible that Natividad Jr. himself was interviewed when Give Up Tomorrow was filmed? Animal (2004) was supposed to be released in 1999 but the lawsuit came in. The film made it to theaters. The film had a huge warehouse where Jaco and his goons would hang out. Jaco and his goons could carry out their sexy party in that place because it's a lot bigger than the alleged place where Jacqueline and Marijoy were raped. Watching the film, the place where the sisters Cherry and Sandra were raped was bigger compared to the boardinghouse in Guadalupe, Cebu City. 

It's too bad that I was only a teenager when the case happened. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What It Felt Like Entering the National Museum of the Philippines in Cebu City

National Museum As a man in his late 30s, I can really miss the memories of the 1990s and the early 2000s (which included my college years ). I miss a lot of people who are no longer with us too. I'd like to share my experience at the National Museum of the Philippines-Cebu . I haven't gone to a historical site in like, forever . Maybe, I could talk about some "historical sites" I "visited" a short time after the pandemic such as Bonsu Temple (a Buddhist temple in Pasil) and the Colon Chinese Temple (which I heard is no longer lived by anyone, if I'm not wrong). I wanted to go to Casa Gorordo, to relive some of my college days. Going to the NMP-Cebu made me feel like a student again.  Entering meant I had to get my ID. I presented my UMID ID as a registration. It was composed of two floors. It's spacious so getting lost (at first) can be expected for a first-time visitor. The first floor contained artifacts. That would remind me of the days at the Un...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nirvana Fallacy and the Die-Hard Defenders of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines

IMGUR The philosopher Voltaire (real name  François-Marie Aroue ) was said to have said, "Perfect is the enemy of good." To define the Nirvana fallacy, we can look at Logically Fallacious to help us define it: Description: Comparing a realistic solution with an idealized one , and discounting or even dismissing the realistic solution as a result of comparing to a “perfect world” or impossible standard, ignoring the fact that improvements are often good enough reason . Logical Form: X is what we have. Y is the perfect situation. Therefore, X is not good enough. Example #1: What’s the point of making drinking illegal under the age of 21?  Kids still manage to get alcohol. Explanation: The goal in setting a minimum age for drinking is to deter underage drinking, not abolish it completely.  Suggesting the law is fruitless based on its failure to abolish underage drinking completely, is fallacious. Example #2: What’s the point of living?  We’re all going to die anyway. Ex...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rare Interview Footage of Ninoy Aquino and Doy Laurel in Japan, Reveal Marcos Years Were NEVER a Legitimate Parliamentary System

People who are afraid of shifting to a parliamentary system tend to use the Marcos Years as proof. Fearmongers on Facebook are still up to their old tricks, using the Marcos Years to say, "No to cha-cha!" Never mind that a new constitution had to be written after 1986. If anything, Article XVII was inserted in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines because it was never meant to be set in stone. Also, the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines was illegal .  Here's a video of the late Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" A. Aquino Jr. and the late Salvador "Doy" Laurel. The words of Laurel here show the problem of Marcos' "parliament". Marcos' "parliament" lacked legitimacy . Where was the sporting chance of the Opposition? If it was a real parliamentary system, Ninoy would've been leading the Opposition in weekly debates against the Marcos-led government. That is if the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. was the prime minister. If Cesar Vir...
Post a Comment
Read more