Cancellation of convict’s bail sought

Prosecutors have asked the court to cancel the P100,000 bail bond of Anthony John Apura shortly after the co-accused in the death of university student Mark James Enriquez requested the court to maintain his bail.

Prosecutors argued that it is necessary for the court to cancel Apura’s bail to prevent him from leaving the country considering that he has the means to do so. They have also opposed Apura’s motion to maintain his bail.

But Apura’s lawyer, Democrito Barcenas, the former president of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, said the prosecutors’ arguments are “merely speculative and not based on proof.”

Barcenas said he would formally file his answer to the opposition tomorrow.

Apura has asked the court to maintain his bond pending appeal of the court’s ruling sending him to 14 years in prison as accomplice to Alpha Kappa Rho member Sherwin Que. The court has separately sentenced Que to 40 years imprisonment as principal accused in the 2003 shooting.

In his motion, Apura said bail is a matter of judicial discretion considering that the circumstances that would make the court cancel his bail do not apply to him.

Apura said he is “neither a recidivist, quasi-recidivist or habitual delinquent, or has committed the crime aggravated by the circumstance of reiteration.”

Apura also said he has not previously escaped from legal confinement or has violated bail without valid justification. In fact, he said he had voluntarily surrendered to authorities and has neither escaped nor committed any infraction against the law when he was granted bail.

He also did not commit any offense while under probation or parole or conditional appeal.

He further contended that he would not flee because he is not a foreigner or a person without any address, and that the probability to escape is very slim considering that he is a student and has no record that he evaded authorities even after he was tagged as suspect.

In ruling against the accused, the court said the testimonies of the prosecution’s witness were “clear and definite” to hold Que liable as principal in the crime of murder. The court gave weight to testimonies of witnesses that Que did not shoot in self-defense or hit Enriquez by mistake.

Enriquez had been mistaken as member of rival fraternity Tau Gamma when Que shot him on July 19, 2003 when a rumble ensued at Unibeersities Restobar between members of the two fraternities.

Que, an Akrho member for 14 years, last year admitted to the shooting when he took the witness stand but claimed it was purely an accident and that he was just defending himself when a rumble ensued. He had apologized in open court.

Other Akrho members impleaded in the case are Jun-jun Rivera, Alvin Taggart Alviz and an unidentified companion. Only Que and Apura were arrested.

In the 20-page decision, Judge Bienvenido Saniel has ordered for warrants of arrest to be issued against those at large and for a separate trial against them once they are arrested.

Que maintained that he only met Apura when they were both jailed for the same murder case. Apura is currently out on bail.  — Joeberth M. Ocao/MEEV