Fake 'fake docs' claim?

Fake 'fake docs' claim?


By BERTENI "TOTO" CATALUÑA CAUSING
Editor-in-chief, Dyaryo Magdalo

IS "FAKE DOCS" CLAIM FAKE?

This question was material on Day 16 of the Impeachment Trial.

The manager of Katipunan Branch of PS Bank had been so evasive and pretending not to know the simple questions thrown to her. 

The question repeatedly told her was: ARE THE BANK DOCS EXACT COPIES OF THE ORIGINALS IN THE POSSESSION OF THE BANK? 

First she answered the documents looked like original.

But after she glanced at her lawyer, she changed her answer.

Confused, Impeachment Trial Presiding Officer Enrile repeated the question.

After repetition of the same questions of whether those documents are original copies of the documents, the manager of PS Bank branch hesitantly answered the bank documents submitted by the prosecution claiming these were Corona's bank accounts were "fake." 

IF INDEED THESE ARE FAKE, THEN IT IS A BIG BLOW TO THE PROSECUTION.

In reaction, Enrile ordered the prosecution to explain.

The only way to know whether these bank documents are fake or not is to bring to the Impeachment Court the originals of those bank documents of Corona's five (5) peso accounts.

Then, there was an answer from the bank manager that their branch did not have possession of these documents pointing to the head office of PS Bank.

ANO BA TALAGA?

I suspect, the bank officials are evasive because they want to remove the impression upon the public that it is dangerous to open bank accounts with PS Bank.

This is the only suspense as the Corona trial enters the 17th day.

Comments

acson005 said…
I just finished watching the replay of the impeachment. To prove that the documents were fake; you need an expert to compare such documents to the original that is probably in the mind of senator Escudero when he insisted that the witness bring an original copy of such document not to be presented as evidence but only for the purpose of comparison. I think the prosecutors and the senators are pushing it too far. It would have been enough that the witness identified the 5 time-deposit accounts of the CJ as belonging to their branch. The branch manager is not an expert witness to declare that such document is a fake or genuine although she later admitted that the head office also has a file of all their depositors meaning the documents are genuine copies coming from the bank’s main branch whose form could be different. The senators likewise are trying to show (grandstanding) that the documents were illegally procured but the documents in my opinion are immaterial. The one page piece of paper containing the 5 accounts number should have sufficed which could be attained by any computer savvy individual who has an access to the bank's computer.
nanardxz said…
show the original docs so to compare with docs they are claiming to be fake, that's the only solution.

I love reading ur commentaries sir. more.