Suspect in judge's slay recants, claims torture

BACOLOD CITY, Philippines – One of the suspects in the killing of Kabankalan Judge Henry Arles has retracted the statement he gave to the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), and claimed that he was tortured into owning up to the crime. 

During a summary hearing at the Regional Trial Court Branch 42 here last Wednesday, Eddie Fortunado, 24, denied any role in the crime and alleged that he was tortured by Arles’ son supposedly in the presence of lawyer Frank Britanico, spokesman of the Arles family. 

“I was electrocuted by Philip Arles. He whipped my testicles and covered my head with a wet plastic bag,” Fortunado alleged. 

During the hearing, Fortunado said he wanted the court to help him because NBI-Bacolod agents took him allegedly without any arrest warrant last June 27 in Binalbagan and brought him to NBI office here and later to the NBI headquarters in Manila. 

Fortunado also denied seeking protective custody with the NBI. 

NBI-Bacolod head Ferdinand Lavin earlier said Fortunado, along with fellow suspects Jessie Daguia and Vincent Capunong, has been detained at the NBI central office since last week of June because they sought protective custody in writing. 

When Judge Fernando Elumba asked him if he indeed sought the NBI’s protective custody, Fortunado, however, said he did not. 

Fortunado said Britanico, who is Philip’s uncle, gave him a piece of paper and pen and told him to write that he was giving himself up because he had knowledge about the judge’s killing.

“I refused to sign but he said that if I would not sign, he would electrocute me,” he said in the dialect.

Lavin, who was also at the summary hearing, denied Fortunado’s statements.  “He’s lying. I don’t believe his torture stories,” he told reporters. 

Lavin said the NBI would show to the court in the next hearings on Sept. 13-14 documents showing that Fortunado had requested for protective custody. 

He said it was expected of Fortunado to withdraw or dishonor his statements, but he refused to comment on what might be the reason behind it. 

For his part, Britanico said the retraction could be against Fortunado’s own interest. 

“In this particular case, the evidence against him is conclusive and it can stand on its own,” he said.