Witnesses in Blanca case presented

No hysterics from suspect Philip Medel this time.

Prosecutors in the murder of actress Nida Blanca tried to strengthen their parricide case against her American husband Rod Luaren Strunk by presenting 27 witnesses to the Department of Justice yesterday.

The witnesses swore before a three-man panel headed by Senior State Prosecutor Archimedes Manabat, assisted by State Prosecutor Aida Macapagal and Mark Jalandoni. A second hearing was set on Sept. 12 at 9:30 a.m.

Among those present were Blanca’s only daughter Kaye Torres, her grandmother Inocencia Aqueza, 88, trusted aide Elena dela Paz, Romulo Kintanar, Rogelio Salude, Danilo Gonzaga, Elena Madrilejos, Pedro Pates, Emmanuel Tansingco and many others.

At the same time, the NBI asked the Manabat panel to "amend" the parricide case against Strunk, and change it to murder, just like alleged killer Philip Medel’s, because his 1981 marriage to Blanca was "void" since it was contracted in the United States.

But Manabat said the motion would be decided once the resolution of the case is finalized, and gave the NBI 15 days to "complete" the submission of all its evidence, and 15 more days for the defense lawyers to rebut the allegations.

Meantime, defense lawyers Salvador Panelo (for Medel) and Alma Mallonga (for Strunk) said they were "disappointed" with the DOJ’s denial of their request for the prosecutors to compel the NBI and PNP-CIDG to produce concealed documents.

"I’m disappointed. It’s not fair. We’re going to evaluate our options. And going to the Supreme Court is a very real option. We’re going to discuss this," said Mallonga. For his part, Panelo replied: "I’m stunned. I can’t believe they denied our motion."

Invoking a long line of Supreme Court decisions, the duo reiterated the "mode of discovery" rule is allowed even during preliminary investigations because this may do away with the risk of having a trial especially so when the case merits a dismissal.

Defense lawyers’ persistence in having their request granted caught the ire of former Sandiganbayan Justice Harriet Demetriou, Torres’ lawyer, who was offended by the implied accusation that they were "suppressing" evidence.

Demetriou’s statement was seconded by lawyer Ericson Velasquez of the CIDG.

Manabat nevertheless assured both parties that all the issues raised will be decided by the panel thoroughly. "We will assure you that we will only rule on what evidence we have," he said, as he denied the defense motion for documents to be produced.

"We can’t compel the complainant to submit evidence. At this point, we are sorry but we deny your motion. It’s unnecessary at this point. These motions ( to produce documents) should be incorporated in your counter-affidavit," he stressed.

Mallonga argued that the documents they wanted — like results of Mike Martinez’s disappearance, Medel’s confession, psychiatric and physical test results, lie detector test, identify of persons not named in the suit–would absolve their clients.

"They are not only material for our defense, but also exculpatory to our clients,’ she said. Mallonga likewise sought the case’s dismissal, saying that it appeared the NBI has not yet finished its probe. "This is premature. There’s no basis for this."