Defense lawyer assails credibility of witness vs Ampatuans

MANILA, Philippines – Defense lawyer Gregorio Narvasa III has questioned the credibility of a witness presented by the prosecution as a “trusted aide” of former Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) governor Andal Ampatuan Sr.

Narvasa said witness Lakmudin Saliao cannot be considered as “a trusted aide” of the Ampatuan patriarch because Saliao admitted during cross-examination that he started working for Ampatuan Sr. only on Nov. 2 last year, less than a month before the massacre took place on Nov. 23.

Saliao also admitted to the court that his job was merely to “manage and monitor” the elder Ampatuan Sr.’s calls, occasionally prepare meals for him, bring him medicines to be taken during the day, and relay messages during meetings. 

Narvasa said Saliao could not have been near the elder Ampatuan in all his important meetings because he admitted to leaving Ampatuan Sr.’s side on Nov. 17, 2009, the day when members of the family supposedly met to plan the massacre. 

Saliao claimed that he brought Ampatuan Sr. to the family farm in Barangay Bagong where he was joined by Datu Andal Ampatuan Jr.

He said the meeting took place at around 7:30 a.m. but admitted that he was not able to stick around for long because Ameera Ampatuan Mamalapat, daughter of the elder Ampatuan called him at 8:30 a.m to ask him to pick up in Shariff Aguak the food prepared for the group.

Saliao said he was able to return to Barangay Bagong at 11:30 a.m. The group left for the Ampatuan house in Shariff Aguak at 5 p.m where Ampatuan Sr. promptly went to bed upon arrival.

Narvasa said Saliao’s statement contradicts his earlier statement that he personally heard the Ampatuan clan plotting the massacre. 

The defense lawyer said that based on the cross examination of Saliao’s testimony, he should be charged for being a conspirator in the massacre because he admitted to participating in the planning.  

“He is not actually a witness but actually a participant as shown by the actions he did on that day,” Narvasa said.

In his Sept. 8 and 15 testimonies, Saliao said he served as a communication officer for Ampatuan Sr. during the planning of the massacre. 

Saliao also said he waited for Ampatuan Jr.’s call on the day of the massacre to report that the convoy of the Mangudadatu clan was already held at a checkpoint near the crime site.