Still, a Filipino-American association is looking into the legitimacy of the political cash contribution, which could open Lacson’s supporters to federal investigation.
"Judgment day will not come for Lacson on Sept. 7 after all," lawyer Rodel Rodis, who won damages for California businesswoman Blanquita Pelaez, said. "On Aug. 30 Lacson’s counsel Michael Cardoza delivered a cashier’s check for $37,034 in full payment of the court judgment against his client."
Rodis said this "averted a hearing of the Superior Court in Alameda County where Lacson was required to disclose before Judge Barbara Miller the source, status and whereabouts of his assets in the United States."
Rodis and Pelaez learned about the check payment from ABS-CBN news in California. "According to a report, the money was raised overnight by an ad-hoc group calling itself Filipino-Americans for Panfilo Lacson, or FA4PL, formed by two of Lacson’s sons residing in Los Angeles," Rodis said. "The group solicited contributions in the thousands, according to the news, from corporations like Mami King, RCBC Dollar Remittance Group, and Atlas Forwarder, as well as from individual supporters."
Judge Miller had issued a bench warrant for Lacson, held in abeyance until his appearance in court at 2 p.m. of Sept. 7 (5 a.m. Sept. 8 in Manila) to state how he would pay Pelaez with clean money. Lacson was under court order since 2003 to pay Pelaez $31,262 (P1,7 million), plus interest and court expenses, for reneging on a handcuff supply to the Phil. National Police which he headed in 1999-2000. Judge Miller’s latest summons came with instructions for Lacson to submit bank statements, business books, vehicle registrations, real estate titles, insurance policies and other proof of wealth.
"Paying the judgment through an ad-hoc group was Lacson’s only option," Rodis said. "He could not risk attending his order-of-examination hearing on Sept. 7 to answer questions about his documented assets under penalty of perjury. He also could not fail to appear, as the bench warrant would be issued for his arrest when he next sets foot in America. And he could not pay the judgment with his own personal check as that would raise more questions about his assets."
Lacson had ignored the damage suit filed by Pelaez in 2001. Only when the Superior Court of California ruled against him did he recognize its jurisdiction over Pelaez’s sales agentry signed by Smith and Wesson in Alameda. Yet Lacson refused to pay up, eliciting the order of examination.
Rodis earlier wrote in a newspaper column that he would ask Lacson about hundred-thousand-dollar bank deposits and home purchases as far back as 1996, when the senator was a colonel in the Presidential Anti-Crime Commission. He also detailed transfers of larger amounts to California bank accounts of Lacson’s wife, and her purchase of two luxury SUVs months before the 2001 elections when Lacson won as senator.
"The payment of the judgment marks the end of a long and winding road that began in Nov. 2001, when Blanquita saw me about her legal problem," Rodis said. He recounted having proved in court that Lacson withheld payment of the Smith and Wesson handcuffs during his PNP stint after Pelaez refused to sue certain officers whom he wanted to depose.
Contacted in Los Angeles eight hours by car from Alameda, Pelaez said she would still appear in court on Sept. 7 because she had not received formal notice of Lacson’s lawyer’s payment. "I also still expect Lacson to show up, as he announced to the Manila press last week. He always declares willingness to show up here."
A Fil-Am association, meanwhile, said it would inquire if the FA4PL group secured permits to solicit funds, or declared activities and earnings to the US government. Strict laws govern political contributions, a member who requested non-attribution wrote. He recalled that Manila Rep. Mark Jimenez was convicted for fraud and jailed in Florida for using the names of employees as contributors of his own money to the Democratic Party in 1996. Under US law, political contributors must show proof of capability, and fund-raisers must disclose their sources of income.
The member wrote that many Filipino-Americans, disappointed with a 2001 Senate inquiry’s failure to report on his alleged criminal activities, are keen on filing money-laundering charges against Lacson.
Pelaez has not heard of the anti-Lacson association, but said she would ask the judge, for her own sake, if FA4PL had legitimately raised the money. "I don’t want to run afoul of our laws," she said. I need to know if it’s clean money, or if Lacson only used the names of the FA4PL donors for his own concealed money."
Pelaez said she could not call any government office for information yesterday morning (Monday afternoon in California) because it was Labor Day holiday.
Rodis, in San Francisco adjacent to Alameda, had not heard too about the inquiring Fil-Am association. "It has nothing to do with this case," he said, adding that he does not know either if the FA4PL had permits to solicit money.
Rodis said he received word that Lacson arrived in Los Angeles Friday night. "But I don’t think he will show up in court to confirm or deny under oath my records of his assets," he said. "I read from an Internet edition of a Manila newspaper that he would join a pro-impeachment rally in Manila on Tuesday."