Skip to main content

Reviewing the Controversial Case of the Late Antonio L. Sanchez


I could remember the controversial Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) controversy. The late Antonio L. Sanchez was supposedly qualified but that was later denied by former president Rodrigo R. Duterte. Right now, it creates a case of curiosity if Antonio is truly innocent or guilty. Some criminals can lie to the public about their non-involvement such as what the late Leo Echegaray did. However, others were wrongfully accused like Hubert Jeffry P. Webb and Francisco Juan "Paco" G. LarraƱaga. In the case of Hubert and Paco, there were witnesses to back it up that they couldn't have done the crime.

Criminal investigations can get really messy. As mentioned earlier, Hubert and Paco were both innocent. There are cases where a crime happens and the wrong people are caught. There are cases where a crime happens and the right people are caught. In the case of the late Eileen Sarmenta, her parents immediately recognized the body. Antonio alleged that Kit Alqueza, the former boyfriend of Eileen, was the one who supposedly did the crime. At that time, Antonio was said to be planning to run for governor and was rivals with the Alquezas. 

As I watched the documentary, Antonio still insists that he couldn't have done the crime. However, unlike Paco and Hubert, there don't seem to be any witnesses backing what he said up. Paco had more than 30 witnesses, photos, etc. to prove that he was in Manila. Hubert had documents that proved he was in the USA when the Vizconde Massacre happened. There was the alibi that Antonio was supposedly with his paramour named Elvira. I wonder where were the others who could testify that Antonio was with Elvira Jimenez (and they had a daughter, Marie Tonee Jimenez Sanchez) at that time in Bay, Laguna? Where are the records to prove it? 

This detail from the Supreme Court E-Library may prove that the alibis done in favor of Antonio, were rehearsed:
To recall, all the appellants relied on the defense of denial/alibi, i.e., they were at their respective homes on the night of the rape-slay.  But Centeno and Malabanan confirmed the presence of all the appellants on the night of June 28, 1993 till the early morning of the following day and detailed the exact participation of each in the crime.  Positive identification by credible witnesses of the accused as the perpetrators of the crime, as we have consistently held, demolishes the alibi[11] - the much abused sanctuary of felons.[12] Moreover, except for the Mayor who presented Ave Marie Tonee Jimenez Sanchez (his daughter with his mistress Elvira) and Medialdea who presented his neighbor Anastacia Gulay, the other appellants failed to present corroborating testimonial evidence to butress their respective alibis.  The defense of alibi is inherently weak especially when wanting in material corroboration.  Categorical declarations of witnesses for the prosecution of the details of the crime are more credible than the uncorroborated alibi interposed by the accused.[13] Ave Marie’s testimony is of no help to the Mayor, since alibi becomes less plausible as a defense when it is invoked and sought to be crafted mainly by the accused himself and his immediate relatives.[14] Anastacia Gulay’s testimony is likewise worthless since the trial court found her testimony rehearsed.  We will not disturb this finding because it touches on credibility.

Unlike the Chiong 7 suspects who were simply your regular delinquents--Antonio had power at that time. The Chiong 7's first two suspects had several people outside their clan to prove their innocence. Paco had his school instructors, the photos (which the late Judge Martin Ocampo et al alleged was possibly tampered with), Cebu City Vice Mayor Raymond Alvin N. Garcia even presented negatives in court, and several witnesses from Manila. Friends aren't immediate relatives. Also, the trial court found that Anastacia Gulay's testimony was rehearsed. Not to mention, Antonio also had lots of unexplained wealth--which could make cover-ups even easier than what the LarraƱagas and Aznars would've have had.

Just reading this from the Philippine Star should make anyone question the claims of Antonio as "wrongly accused": 

Copies of the titles of 19 parcels of land owned by Sanchez and his wife Editha, now registered under the name of the state, were received by the Office of the Ombudsman last March 1, the agency announced yesterday. 

In a decision in July 2016, the Sandiganbayan ordered the forfeiture of Sanchez’s properties, including a residential building, two Mercedez Benzes, a 1991 Dodge Caravan, shares in a lending business as well as cash and bank accounts.

Sanchez and his wife declared an income of P855,073.88 based on their joint tax returns from 1986 to 1992.

Sanchez had a salary of P17,724 per month when he was mayor in 1980 and 1981, P26,388 from 1981 to 1986, and P10,443 from 1988 when Calauan was downgraded to a fifth class municipality

The Sandiganbayan said the tax declaration and income of the couple were “grossly disproportionate” to their lavish lifestyle.

Graft probers said the couple sent their three children to Hurtwood House, an exclusive school in London with a tuition of P1 million each; had frequent trips to the United States, Italy, United Kingdom, Germany, Japan and Hong Kong; hosted a lavish birthday party for 550 guests at Manila Hotel, and owned several properties, including luxury vehicles.

“Respondents’ assets and expenses were grossly and manifestly disproportionate to their legitimate income… These assets and the funds used for the disproportionate expenses were unlawfully acquired… and subject to forfeiture,” the Sandiganbayan ruling read.

Later on, it was revealed that while in prison, Antonio also had misbehavior involving drugs inside Bilibid. Later on, the same person had a lot of contraband to answer for in 2015. This was different from what Paco and his co-accused were in Bilibid. Paco wasn't getting any special treatment whether he was in Bagong Buhay Rehabilitation Center (BBRC) or when he was transferred to New Bilibid Prison. Paco had proof of his innocence documented. At this point, I doubt that Antonio had any photos or records to prove he was with his mistress in Bay, Laguna. 

Unfortunately, there are times when the guilty get punished along with the innocent. I believe that Antonio is guilty as much as I believe Hubert and Paco are innocent. With how Antonio was, it can be safe to assume that his trial wasn't haphazard unlike what happened to Hubert and Paco. 

Popular posts from this blog

The 1986 Snap Elections Would Also Disprove the Myth of the "Marcos Parliament"

Anti-charter change proponents love to use Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. among their reasons, to defend their stand. The argument is that "charter change must be evil" because Marcos used it--a fallacy of Guilt by Association . Please, even Atty. Maria Leonor Gerona-Robredo's supporter  Andrew James Masigan  supports charter change! Now, we must look at Marcos and remember another significant event. It's the 1986 snap elections and why it's also proof that we never had a parliamentary form of government. February 7, 1986, was when Marcos declared snap elections. Two years before the snap election, Marcos even declared that the Philippines was never a parliamentary government under him : The adoption of certain aspects of a parliamentary system in the amended Constitution does not alter its essentially presidential character . Article VII on the Presidency starts with this provision:  ‘the President shall be the Head of State and Chief Executive of the Republic of the Ph...

Facts vs. Gossip: The "Chona Mae" Incident is Proof You NEED to Verify What You Hear

It was in 2012 when the Chona Mae incident happened. I remember the panic when people were running the opposite direction while I was working at Downtown, Cebu. The traffic was bad. People were panikcing. But the real twist? It was actually a father looking for his daughter, whose identity we may never know.  The Cebu Daily News   said this last 2022, which was before entering the post-COVID world: CEBU CITY, Philippines — It has been a decade since the famous “Chona Mae” line was uttered by a father looking for her daughter after a 6.9 magnitude earthquake struck the island of Cebu, February 6, 2012 .  From what was a simple call of a father to his daughter turned out to be the biggest tsunami scare in Cebu City.  “Ang tubig naa na sa Colon!” ("The Water is already in Colon!") was the line that has gotten everyone running on the street of Cebu looking for shelters up in the mountain parts of Cebu.  Today, we remember that frightful yet somehow funny day that w...

The Foolishness of Complaining About Stupid Voters and Stupid Candidates, While Insisting the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "So Perfect"

I was looking into the Facebook page of Butthurt Philippines . Honestly, it's easy to complain but what's the use of complaining if you reject the solutions? The art produced by its administrator shows some problems. However, if the administrator here believes that the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "perfect as it is" (and he seems to be throwing a "saving face" by saying it was just sarcasm, and I failed to detect it) then it's really something. It's one thing to keep complaining. Complaining can be good. However, what's the use of complaining if you reject the solutions. Even worse, complaining about the quality of candidates for the upcoming 2025 midterm elections , while still saying, "It's not the system it's the people!" Please, that kind of thinking has been refuted even by basic psychology and political science! It's really good to point out the three problems. Distractions? Check. Keeping people hopeless? ...

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...

Why I Believe So Many Filipinos (Especially Boomers) Misunderstand (and Blindly Oppose) Charter Change

Okay, I'm no political analyst or historian. That doesn't mean I should just shut up and not share my opinion. I felt like I needed to publish this piece. This is where I want to examine another issue. I've noticed some people on Facebook are sharing the quotes of Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. Some would try to do Ad Hominem attacks on me because I'm no constitutionalist (which I admit that I'm not). Just because I'm not a constitutionalist, doesn't mean, that I can't quote from the experts . Do I really need a degree in law at one of those prestigious universities in the Philippines? Sadly, some people are supposedly smarter than me but are the ones spreading nonsense.  Understanding charter change We need to see the definition first to understand why so many Filipinos, especially boomers , are so against it. The Philippine Star   gives this definition of charter change: Charter change, simply, is the process of introducing amendments or revisions to the ...