Skip to main content

Today in History: Revisiting the Late Martin Ocampo's Demise

 

An injustice for one is an injustice for the whole community. What people never thought that in their demand for blood--the wrong people were caught! It turns out that Francisco Juan "Paco" G. Larrañaga was in Quezon City when the Chiong sisters went missing (read here). On October 7, 1999, the trial judge who had doubts about the body found in the ravine was found dead in Waterfront, Lapu-Lapu. The incident happened while I was still in my second year of high school. There was not much access to the Internet back then nor was it viewed as a necessity, unlike today!

Back then, I felt Ocampo was murdered. There was allegedly some hair sample that was his--probably his mistress. However, forensics expert Dr. Raquel Fortun has concluded it was suicide. Dr. Fortun also showed up in the documentary Give Up Tomorrow which highlights two things--a crime that remains unsolved and how Paco was wrongfully arrested. Paco admitted on Dong Puno Live that he and Josman Aznar have a bad reputation. However, Paco was in Manila on July 16, 1997--that night when the Chiong Sisters went missing!

After an exhaustive and comprehensive re-autopsy on the body of Ocampo, Dr. Raquel del Rosario-Fortun said in her report that Ocampo took his own life inside Room 502 of the Waterfront Hotel in Mactan last Oct. 7.

"Based on available information regarding the circumstances surrounding (Ocampo's) death obtained from the investigation and the autopsy procedures, the injuries sustained are deemed to be self-inflicted and intentional, therefore the manner of death is classified as suicide," Fortun said in the report announced Friday by the Senate committee on justice and human rights.

Sen. Renato Cayetano, who chairs the committee, consequently ordered the Senate inquiry into Ocampo's death closed and terminated.

The Senate panel embarked on the re-autopsy to erase doubts that there was foul play in the death of Ocampo, who hogged the headlines last year for his verdict on the Chiong sisters' rape-slay case.

Cayetano, however, said the inquiry may be reopened if some physical evidence which would tend to disprove the findings of suicide is uncovered later.

The way Dr. Fortun said it in Give Up Tomorrow was this. Was Ocampo coerced to write the note? That's a good question to ask. Another thing Dr. Fortun mentioned was how Ocampo may have slashed himself at those parts, hoping he'd die and he tried something else. It seems Ocampo's guilty conscience had hit him hard. If Ocampo was indeed trying to end his life because of a guilty conscience--chances are he kept missing the vital parts. Eventually, when all else failed, a gun sufficed. So far, it seems nobody was in the room where Ocampo was later found dead.

Ocampo's conscience may have bothered him over these issues brought up in Give Up Tomorrow:

  1. Why did Ocampo choose to deem the identity of the body found in Tan-awan, Carcar, as irrelevant? The body's identity could've provided closure because if it was really one of the Chiong Sisters--it should at least provide closure for the victims' family. 
  2. Why did Ocampo not allow the Chiong 7 to testify? Why was he glued to Davidson Rusia, who by the way, was also not allowed to testify? Not to mention, Davidson had so many inconsistencies in his stories. Was it to get it over and done with.
  3. Why didn't Ocampo hear more of the defense before dismissing it? This includes dismissing pieces of evidence provided by Paco's friends that the lead suspect was indeed in Manila when the crime happened. Why did he just deem the photos manipulated without examining them?
  4. Ocampo was also caught sleeping during hearings. One must wonder did he really listen to all the details? 
  5. After the end of the trial, Ocampo later admitted that the body was doubtful. He also admitted that it wasn't "certain" that there was rape or murder, but he was "certain" that there was kidnapping and illegal detention. 
  6. Did Ocampo attempt to play Pontius Pilate with the crowd? The crowd was already convinced that Paco and his co-accused were the ones who did it. However, it seems that he knew deep within, there was something wrong. Did that nag on his conscience for months to come before he ended his life?
Everything that led to the trial was indeed a circus. As I watched Give Up Tomorrow--there were many missing angles. It's easy to dismiss it because the maker of the documentary was related to Paco by marriage. I read both the Supreme Court decision and the movie (read here). People came up with their conclusions. What might be ignored is that Thelma Jimenea-Chiong was a relative-by-marriage to then chief justice, Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. Davide's wife's is Virginia Jimenea Perez! Paco isn't legally related to producer Marty Syjuco. For clarification, Marty is the brother of Mimi Larrañaga-Syjuco's husband Miguel. Marty only met Paco during the wedding and didn't know Paco much either! 

Revisiting the incident, I wonder how would the brain-numbing movie Jacqueline Comes Home  (read review here) handle this scene? The movie didn't mention that the judge committed suicide. As I watched the movie--why wasn't Ocampo's suicide even included at all? The movie could've at least brought it up. The scene where students are debating whether or not the right people are caught (and Paco is simply called Sonny outright in the film) has two sides. Unfortunately, you've got law practitioners who may be oh too beholden to the Supreme Court of the Philippines and say, "The justice system should be trusted. It will never condemn an innocent person." Did they ever read the case of George Stinney--an African American teenager who was wrongfully executed? There are many around the world on death row who have done nothing to deserve the death penalty! 

Ocampo may be dead but there are still many truths needed. Who was the late Dionisio Chiong supposed to testify against before his daughters went missing? Why didn't the police look at the angle that Mr. Chiong's daughters went missing after he was called to testify? Why didn't the judge even bother the validity of the arrests or even the witness? The judge's motives would be hard to look into, especially since he's been too dead to do anything. However, this judge should be a lesson that something's wrong with the Philippine justice system!

Popular posts from this blog

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...

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? ...

A Parliamentary Philippines with Mandatory Weekly Questioning Will Be Better Than Its Mandatory Yearly Presidential SONAs

Rappler I must admit that ignorance of the difference between the parliamentary system vs. the presidential system is there. Some people still insist on the myth that the first Marcos Administration headed by President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.'s late father, Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr., was really a parliamentary system. In reality. the Marcos "parliamentary" years during the Martial Law era, were still presidential (read why  here ). A simple research would show that Cesar Virata was called by the late Lee Kuan Yew, as a non-starter and no leader. LKY would know how a real parliamentary system works. Sure, it's one thing that those who consider themselves Dilawan, voice their criticisms. However, the big problem of the Dilawans is their focus on political idolatry rather than solutions. I can talk with the Dilawans all they want that we do need to shift to the parliamentary system and some of them still cry foul, say that it'll be a repetition of the first Marcos Admi...

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...

Don't Expect a Mahathir-Type Leader, Under the 1987 Constitution!

ABS CBN News Happy 100th birthday, Mahathir Mohamad! It's something that not so many people live up to 100, or more. The late Fidel V. Ramos passed away on July 31, 2022, at the age of 94. Ramos's advanced age may be the reason why the Omicron variant (which isn't supposedly fatal) ended his life. I'm posting this image of Ramos and Mahathir for one reason--Ramos wanted charter change back in the 1990s. However, plenty of anti-charter change commercials came in, the late Raul Roco said we only need a change in people, and we have Hilario G. Davide Jr. (who's in his late 80s but still active), and the idea that having a president who will rule for more than six years, is supposedly scary. Please, have they even thought that the late Pol Pot ruled Cambodia for just four years, but carried millions of deaths , that would make the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.'s 20-year reign  look tame (read here )? I've read posts on Facebook saying the Philippines just needs l...