Trial by Publicity Gives an Illusion of "Due Process"

Jourdan Sebastian

Some may remember the Chiong Sisters Case as the "trial of the decade". Before that, some may have remembered the Vizconde Massacre. There was one thing in common between the two trials--trial by publicity! Both of them already had a public hungry for the verdict, even when there was a need for due process. 

We need to know what due process is. Respicio & Co. defines it as:

Query: What is due process in the context of the Philippine legal system?

Due process is a fundamental principle in the Philippine legal system, enshrined in the 1987 Constitution. It ensures that individuals are treated fairly and justly by the law, protecting their rights to life, liberty, and property. Due process consists of two essential components: substantive due process and procedural due process.

Substantive Due Process

Substantive due process pertains to the fairness of the laws themselves. It requires that laws enacted by the government must be fair, reasonable, and just. These laws must not violate basic constitutional rights and should serve a legitimate public interest. For instance, a law that arbitrarily discriminates against a particular group of people or imposes harsh penalties without justification can be challenged as a violation of substantive due process.

Procedural Due Process

Procedural due process, on the other hand, focuses on the methods and procedures used to enforce laws. It ensures that individuals are given adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard before any governmental action that could affect their rights is taken. This component is crucial in judicial and administrative proceedings.

Key elements of procedural due process include:

1. Notice: The individual must be informed of the charges or claims against them in a clear and timely manner.
2. Hearing: The individual must have the opportunity to present their case and evidence before an impartial tribunal or decision-maker.
3. Impartial Tribunal: The decision-maker must be unbiased and not have a personal interest in the outcome of the case.
4. Right to Counsel: In criminal cases, the individual has the right to be represented by a lawyer.
5. Decision Based on Evidence: The outcome must be based on the evidence presented during the hearing.
6. Judicial Review and Due Process

The judiciary plays a crucial role in ensuring due process is upheld. Courts have the power to review laws and government actions to determine if they comply with due process requirements. If a law or action is found to violate due process, it can be declared unconstitutional and void.

My two favorite examples that demonstrate the illusion of due process in trial by publicity

The Vizconde Massacre happened on June 30, 1991. The trial only began on August 10, 1995. There was a vacuum with people trying to find answers to questions like (1) who committed the crime, and (2) how it happened, just to name a few. The Vizconde Massacre case seemed to have answers by 1995 when Hubert Jeffry Webb (the star suspect), with other suspects like Antonio "Tony Boy" Lejano, Michael Gatchalian, Hospicio "Joey" Fernandez, Miguel Rodriguez, and Peter Estrada. Both Artemio "Dong" Ventura and Joey Filart managed to escape. I must wonder if Artemio and Joey are real people or just "random drop names". There was indeed a four-year vacuum. In between, there was also the Vizconde Massacre Story in 1993 that may have further fed the public sentiment. By the time Hubert and his co-accused were arrested, there was already a perfect recipe for trial by publicity. Jessica Alfaro became the "star witness" in retired judge Atty. Amelita G. Tolentino's court. Right now, it's impossible to know for the public whether or not Tolentino is still alive.

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

Years later, the Chiong Sisters case happened. The sisters Jacqueline Jimenea Chiong and Marijoy Jimenea Chiong disappeared on that same night. Until now, there's still debate whether or not the body was indeed Marijoy. The star suspect, Francisco Juan G. Larrañaga, was arrested on September 15, 1997. If I'm not wrong, Josman Aznar was the first to get arrested. However, the problem became even more problematic because not everyone knew each other. I must even wonder how Alberto Caño and Ariel Balansag became suspects as menial labor workers. Even more, Davidson Rusia, the "star witness" only came 10 months later, but he only knew the Uy brothers, James Anthony Uy and James Andrew Uy, as well as Rowen Adlawan who is at the center of the diagram. Both James Anthony and James Andrew were minors at that time.

What do both the Vizconde Massacre trial and the Chiong Sisters trial have in common? I'd like to enumerate what can be observable, such as:

1. Both cases had an "alleged love story". It was said that Hubert was courting the late Carmela Vizconde, who was the eldest daughter of an OFW, the late Lauro Vizconde. It was also said that Paco and Josman were jilted suitors of Marijoy and Jacqueline. In my own speculation, the suitor angle really happened and became a starting point towards the frame-up. Sure, Paco denied courting or knowing Marijoy, but his sister Mimi Larrañaga-Syjuco has a mestizo Chinese husband named Miguel Syjuco, the brother of Marty Syjuco. So at this point, I still believe Paco really knew and courted Marijoy at some point while upholding his innocence. Josman was also revealed to have had some Chinoy friends, too. That's why I believe Josman courted Jacqueline at some point. Then again, courtship doesn't equal guilt!
2. Somebody with a bad reputation had to "pay for the crime" they couldn't have committed. I heard Hubert already had a bad reputation. The same may have been true for his fellow accused. Paco and Josman were already known to be the bad boys of Cebu, which they admitted during the Dong Puno Live interview.
3. Both involve the star suspect being geographically far away to do the crime. Hubert's case was even stronger because he had proof that he was in the United States of America (USA). Hubert had documentation. Paco was in Manila in Quezon City on July 16 that same night. 
4. Both involved a judge who was already biased from the start. Tolentino even refused to have a DNA test that Hubert requested. Years later, the late Judge Martin Ocampo, who ended his life five months after the trial, even denied the request for a DNA test of the body that was found in Tan-awan, Carcar. Aside from a refusal to take a DNA test, both judges snubbed documentation and said, "They may have been tampered with." That's clearly a violation of due process!
5. There was a star witness with an interesting story to tell. However, by using Gemini AI, whicy by the way, should never be a source but should at least narrow down thoughts, would tell a different story. In fact, after doing some Gemini analysis on Jessica's narrative and David's narrative, both narrations, no matter how "well-corroborated," were too preposterous to be real!

Sure, there were trials that went on, but even if due process seemed to be present, it was just an illusion. The illusion was that, "See? We have due process!" Paco was even willing to testify that he was really in Manila, but Ocampo said no. This made me think that people probably rejoiced at that time when Paco's request was denied. The same may have happened when Hubert's documents were turned down. Tolentino is still somewhat applauded by some of the older generation as a fair and honest judge. But honestly? I don't see anything fair and honest with Tolentino denying the process. The due process was a mockery. 

Sadly, the aggrieved parties, namely Lauro and, later, the Chiong couple, Mr. and Mrs. Dioniso Chiong and Thelma-Jimenea Chiong, probably felt they had a sense of justice. However, the Chiong couple had to go to the Supreme Court of the Philippines to make sure Paco and his co-accused were never acquitted. Lauro was hoping that Hubert and his co-accused would never be acquitted either. My assumption is that grief crippled their very ability to see, "Does this story make sense?" to "I deserve justice." Sadly, Lauro died believing a lie. The same happened to Dionisio, who died during the COVID-19 pandemic. I would like to say that they felt like, "They had the due process." But the due process they encountered was all about piling up cases against the accused, not to see whether or not they did the crime, but to make sure they got the maximum penalty possible. 

As it's already 2026, it's sad how both cases remain unsolved. Had due process been done, such as DNA testing, I bet clues to whoever did the crime would've been there. The semen found in Carmela's corpse might point to who committed the crime, or if it was post-mortem rape, or a post-mortem arrangement. A DNA test on the body found in Carcar would've helped someone find their missing daughter, if the body wasn't even Marijoy. I must admit that it's a shame, really, that the trials looked like due process was given but in reality, both were really denied, since due process involves the defense too. As said, it's possible that a crime happened and the wrong people were caught.