123RD PERSUASIVE APPEAL_5JANUARY17_TO THE SCP JUSTICES : BRION, PEREZ AND VILLARAMA RETIREMENT BENEFITS BE SUSPENDED UNTIL RESOLUTION OF COMPLAINT

CONSPIRACY EXPLAINED Here are select February 2013 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on criminal law and procedure: 1.            REVISED PENAL CODE Conspiracy; joint purpose and design. Conspiracy may be deduced from the mode, method, and manner in which the offense was perpetrated; or inferred from the acts of the accused when those acts point to a joint purpose and design, concerted action, and community of interests.Proof of a previous agreement and decision to commit the crime is not essential, but the fact that the malefactors acted in unison pursuant to the same objective suffices. In this case, the prosecution decisively established a community of criminal design among Alvarico, Reyes, and appellant Pondivida. While there is no evidence of any previous agreement among the assailants to commit the crime, their concerted acts before, during and after the incident establish a joint purpose and intent to kill. As attested to by accused-appellant, they all went to the intended victim’s house bearing firearms. Accused-appellant himself knocked on the door. After failing to locate “Udoy” and “Bagsik,” and discovering that Gener was the latter’s brother, they then engaged in a lengthy conversation, as they circled around a nearby well outside the house.Accused even admitted to shouting the name “Bagsik” over and over.They all asked Gener to step outside and speak withthem. Upon his refusal, appellant Pondivida, together with Alvarico, entered the house through an upstairs window. Alvarico fired at George who was at the stairs. Reyes, from his vantage point at the front door, also shot at George.After fleeing the scene, appellant Pondivida admitted that he met with Alvarico in Novaliches. Alvarico gave him money, and the latter thereafter boarded a bus headed to Olongapo City. Their acts together were indicative of a common purpose, which was murder. People of the Philippines v. John Alvin Pondivida, G.R. No. 188969, February 27, 2013. Conspiracy; elements. Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit the felony. Proof of the actual agreement to commit the crime need not be direct because conspiracy may be implied or inferred from their acts. Here, accused PO2 Valdez cannot avoid criminal responsibility for the fatal shooting by co-accused Edwin of Ferdinand and Joselito. Both accused were convincingly shown to have acted in concert to achieve a common purpose of assaulting their unarmed victims with their guns. Their acting in concert was manifest not only from their going together to the betting station on board a single motorcycle, but also from their joint attack that PO2 Valdez commenced by firing successive shots at Moises and immediately followed by Edwin’s shooting of Ferdinand and Joselito one after the other. It was also significant that they fled together on board the same motorcycle as soon as they had achieved their common purpose. To be a conspirator, one did not have to participate in every detail of the execution; neither did he have to know the exact part performed by his co-conspirator in the execution of the criminal acts. Accordingly, the existence of the conspiracy between PO2 Valdez and Edwin was properly inferred and proved through their acts that were indicative of their common purpose and community of interest. People of the Philippines v. PO2 Eduardo Valdez and Edwin Valdez, G.R. No. 175602, February 13, 2013. INFORMATION SEARCHED FROM: February 2013 Philippine Supreme Court Decisions on Criminal Law and Procedure  by Dominador Maphilindo O. Carrillo Published: April, 2013 Submission: April, 2013 http://www.worldservicesgroup.com/publications.asp?action=article&artid=5332 ATTENTION SENATOR RICHARD "DICK" GORDON CHAIRMAN Accountability of Public Officers & Investigations (Blue Ribbon) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE CHAIRMAN

122ND PERSUASIVE APPEAL_4JAN17_TO THE SCP JUSTICES : POLICE YOUR OWN RANK

ATTENTION HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE CHAIRMAN

NADINE LUSTRE BARES NOT ALL

Cheers everyone! Thank you so much for all the effort. ❤️ pic.twitter.com/crFBWLDMzF — Nadine Lustre (@hellobangsie) January 2, 2017 tbh ily (Kidwaste Remix) - Chet Porter 🎶 A photo posted by Nadine Lustre (@nadzlustre) on Jan 2, 2017 at 5:11pm PST

121ST PERSUASIVE APPEAL_3JANUARY17_TO THE SCP JUSTICES_JUSTICES BRION, PEREZ AND VILLARAMA IMMUNITY FROM SUIT ENDS

How the Philippines' incomplete 'People Power' revolution paved the way for Rodrigo Duterte

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has confirmed that he killed three menduring his time as mayor of Davao city, despite officials trying to downplay an earlier admission. Duterte’s comments might yet hurt his popularity but that seems unlikely. Duterte’s national crusade has resulted in an alarming daily average of 34 drug war-related murders. Despite this death toll and international condemnation, public satisfaction with his anti-drug war is at a significantly high rate of 78%. How can this be explained in a country that a mere 30 years ago brought down a dictator without resorting to violence? How could a nation that inspired the world with its peaceful “People Power” revolution now welcome a return to the state-sanctioned murders of the martial-law era of 1972-1981? Duterte’s rise is an evolving lesson in the vulnerability of democracies in the face of a neglected public. The democratic institutions of the Philippines have little power when faced with a populist president determined to channel frustrations into immediate actions. Unfulfilled promise In 1986, millions of Filipinos ended Ferdinand Marcos’ dictatorship through sustained civil resistance against government violence and electoral fraud. This culminated in a massive peaceful protest in the capital along Epifanio Delos Santos Avenue (EDSA). The event is now popularly known as the 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution. Marcos was ousted after 21 years in power. He had been democratically elected as president in 1965, but essentially ruled as a dictator from 1972 to 1986. To the disappointment of many, an elite-dominated democracy replaced Marcos’ authoritarian rule. From 1987, a small number of families started to restore their control of the government and rotate the seats of power among themselves. They included the Marcos family, who returned from exile in 1991and were welcomed by their allies. In the public imagination, the promises of the People Power Revolution went beyond restoring democratic institutions. The narrative went like this: a return to democracy would secure prosperity and security for everyone. The overall framework and various social justice provisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution clearly reflect this. But three decades later, the post-EDSA pact is far from being fulfilled. A neglected public The post-EDSA leadership has failed to solve many of the problems that concern Filipinos. Despite promising national growth rates, the gains appear to have largely benefited the rich. More than 26 million Filipinos remain impoverished. And unemployment rates are said to be the worst in Asia. This widening gap between rich and poor, recurrent domestic economic crises,epidemic levels of corruption and failed attempts to significantly reduce criminality, have left the public deeply frustrated. Surveys in recent decades have consistently shown that these are the most urgent national concerns for many Filipinos. The 1986 revolution, once a symbol of the promise of democracy and prosperity, is now synonymous in the Filipino popular imagination with the dysfunctional transport system in Metro Manila. National commemorations of the EDSA consensus have become officially important, but in the public imagination they tell the tale of how promises are meant to be broken. Democracy’s discontent Amid political and economic exclusion and malaise came Duterte. He offered empathy to the economic strugglers and protection from the violence of criminals and politicians. His was a twin campaign narrative of care and power. His supporters often highlighted how they felt that Duterte truly cared for them. And he was not just all talk. Duterte is seen as a man of action: decisive and quick. His “authenticity” is manifest in his everyday language coupled with humour that comes from the streets. Duterte articulated the public’s deep-seated feelings of precariousness and powerlessness using rhetoric they could relate to. His campaign rallies, which many proclaimed as a marvel to behold, showed the rapport between the candidate and his supporters. Many felt that Duterte rose from the ranks of ordinary citizens despite coming from a traditional political family and holding various political offices for 30 years. This is especially evident in his overwhelming support in the southern Philippines, as the first president from a region long neglected by the capital. How did it come to this? When democracy doesn’t deliver, its legitimacy becomes difficult to defend. And when successive elite-dominated governments have used democracy for their own ends, the balance tilts towards authoritarianism. Under post-EDSA democracy the richest families amassed more wealth than ever while poverty, hunger, homelessness, and crime continued to afflict ordinary Filipinos. It’s not difficult to imagine why some are nostalgic for the authoritarian past. Although national statistics show otherwise, people felt those were the country’s golden years. Extrajudicial killings are a regular feature of post-EDSA governments as they were of the martial law years. Examples include the 1987 Mendiola massacre,2004 Hacienda Luisita massacre and 2009 Maguindanao massacre, to name a few. Perpetrators have not been brought to justice. Even before Duterte, the Philippines was known as the country with the worst state of impunity. Government critics were the usual victims until Duterte took aim at alleged drug dealers and users. In my fieldwork in a massive poor urban community in Quezon City, residents have welcomed Duterte’s war on drugs. They now feel more secure in what they call their “drug-infested community” even though drug use hassubstantially declined compared to previous decades, according to one village official. Residents argue that their perceptions of community security are just as important as the numbers in government records. For people to feel safe in acity where 92% of villages face drug-related crimes and in a nation where crimes against persons and property are rising is no easy thing. When Duterte’s campaign translates to perceived everyday safety, it is no wonder that drug-war murders have not met considerable resistance. Anyone with experience of the country’s institutions of justice knows how elusive criminal justice is. Around 80% of drug cases end up being dismissedand it may take a decade to achieve a conviction. There are many reasons for this, but Duterte’s narrative that drug lords are so powerful that they can influence even the judiciary is not far-fetched. Most people do not trust the judiciary and many are convinced that power and money are needed to claim justice. Previous administrations also made a mockery out of the national justice system; even convicted corrupt politicians enjoy their freedom while innocents languish in jail. A corruption whistleblower, Jun Lozada, wasrecently convicted, while ex-president Gloria Arroyo was acquitted and set free. The legislature has been used to turn issues of justice into a public circus, such as in the impeachment of Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato Corona and the hearings on allegations of graft and corruption against former vice president Jejomar Binay. Is it surprising then that Dutarte’s supporters find calls to follow the rule of law and due process hypocritical? When institutions do not work, it becomes unreasonable to rely on them. Duterte’s narrative plays on the temptations for a disgruntled public to claim swift justice. In the context of his rise to power, it’s no surprise that calls to respect human rights or the rule of law fall on deaf ears. The election of Duterte may be seen as the nadir, but possibly also a turning point, in the long-standing democratic deficit in Asia’s oldest democracy. His rejection of the rule of law and liberal democracy represents a rupture in the post-EDSA consensus. It’s not a stretch to say that the Philippines’ elite democracy had it coming. The failure to deliver on the promises of the People Power revolution made the rise of Duterte politically possible. Cleve Kevin Robert Arguelles, Instructor of Political Science, University of the Philippines This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

The Most Commonly Misused English Words

The English language is not easily mastered. Homonyms — words that are spelled or pronounced the same but mean different things — can be particularly challenging, which is why even the most highly educated English speakers get tripped up sometimes. Steve Pinker, a linguist and cognitive scientist at Harvard University, compiled a list of the 58 most commonly misused words. Adverse: Unfavorable or harmful; commonly confused with "averse," which means disinclined. Appraise: To evaluate the value of something; commonly confused with "apprise," which means "to inform." As far as: The same; commonly confused with the phrase "as for," which means "with regard to." Begs the question: Implies a conclusion that isn't supported by evidence; commonly confused with "raises the question." Bemused: Bewildered; commonly confused with "amused," which means entertained. Cliché: A noun; commonly misused as an adjective. Credible: Believable; commonly confused with "gullible." Criteria: A plural word; commonly misused as a singular word. The singular is "criterion." Data: A plural word; commonly used as a singular noun. Depreciate: To decrease in value; commonly confused with "deprecate," which means to disapprove of. Dichotomy: A division between two things; commonly confused with "a difference." Disinterested: Unbiased; commonly confused with "uninterested." Enervate: To cause someone to feel drained; commonly misused to mean "to energize." Enormity: Extremely bad or morally wrong; commonly confused with "enormous." Flaunt: To show off; commonly confused with "flout," which means "to openly disregard." Flounder: To struggle helplessly; commonly confused with "founder," which means to fill with water and sink. Fortuitous: To happen by chance; commonly confused with "fortunate." Fulsome: Excessively flattering; commonly misused to mean "full or copious." Homogeneous: Pronounced "home-genius." The word is commonly misspelled as "homogenous." Hone: Sharpen or refine; commonly misused in the phrase "home in on," which means to move toward a goal or target. Hot button: An emotionally or politically charged issue; commonly confused with "hot topic." Hung: Suspended; commonly misused to mean "suspended from the neck until dead." Intern (verb): To detain or imprison; commonly confused with "inter," which means to bury a body. Ironic: To happen in a way that's opposite to expectations; commonly misused to mean "unfortunate." Irregardless: Not a word, but commonly confused with "regardless." Literally: A fact; commonly confused with "figuratively," or metaphorically. Luxuriant: Rich or lush; commonly confused with "luxurious." Meretricious: To appear attractive but lack value or sincerity; commonly confused with "meritorious," which means to deserve praise. Mitigate: Alleviate; commonly confused with "militate," which means to be "a powerful or conclusive factor in preventing." New Age: Spiritualistic and holistic; commonly misused to mean modern or futuristic. Noisome: Smelly; commonly misused to mean noisy." Nonplussed: Surprised or confused; commonly misused to mean bored. Opportunism: Exploiting opportunities; commonly misused to mean creating opportunities. Parameter: A variable; commonly misused to mean a condition or limit. Phenomena: A plural noun; commonly misused as a mass noun. Politically correct: Inoffensive or appropriate; commonly misused to mean fashionable. Practicable: To be able to put together successfully; commonly confused with "practical." Proscribe: To condemn; commonly confused with "prescribe," which means to recommend. Protagonist: An active or lead character; commonly confused with "proponent." Refute: To prove something false; commonly misused to mean "to allege to be false." Reticent: Restrained, or shy; commonly confused with "reluctant." Shrunk, sprung, stunk, and sunk: All of these words are used in the past participle and are commonly misused in the past tense. Simplistic: Overly simple; commonly misused to mean "pleasantly simple." Staunch: Loyal; commonly confused with "stanch," which means to stop the flow. Tortuous: Twisting; commonly confused with "torturous." Unexceptionable: Not open to objection; commonly confused with "unexceptional," which means ordinary. Untenable: Not sustainable; commonly misused to mean painful or unbearable. Urban legend: A false and widely circulated story; commonly misused to mean "someone who is legendary in a city." Verbal: In linguistic form; commonly confused with "spoken." An effect: An influence. To effect: To put something into effect. To affect: To influence or fake. To lie (as in "lies, lay, has lain"): To recline. To lay (as in "lays, laid, has laid"): To set down. To lie (as in "lies, lied, has lied"): To fib. The relative difficulty of the English language has a lot to do with the fact that so many of its words are derived from other languages such as French, Latin, and Greek. And unlike those other languages, the rules of English have been historically subject to debate, evolving over time. That has resulted in spelling mutations and sometimes confusing grammatical guidelines, leading some to conclude that English is one of the hardest languages to learn for non-native speakers. "As native speakers, we rarely stop to think how illogical many of the things we say really are – we’re just used to them," the Oxford Royale Academy wrote in a 2014 blog post. "Unless you’ve been brought up speaking English, how can you possibly begin to learn all these oddities? It’s little wonder that people trying to learn English end up feeling confused." [h/t The Independent]

NEW YEARS EVE 2017 DUBAI

2016 SYDNEY NEW YEARS EVE

DRUNKARDS ON THE LOOSE

SELF-DEFENSE VIDEO_HAPKIDO