Atty. Adel Tamano Defends Dra. Vicki Belo in StarTalk Interview, June 13, 2009

15 June 2009

Atty. Adel Tamano was interviewed by the hosts of StarTalk on June 13, Saturday. 

In said interview, the lawyer of Dra. Vicki Belo explained in considerable detail why his client is innocent of the charge of uploading or distributing the Hayden Kho sex videos.  Atty. Tamano labelled as untrue Eric Chua's claim in his affidavit submitted to the NBI that he left Dr. Belo's house ahead of the lady cosmetic surgeon.  The fact, according to Atty. Tamano, was that Eric Chua was left alone for about an hour and a half in Dra. Belo's house with the computer and the videos on the night in question.

Atty. Tamano also disclosed that Eric Chua got the wrong date of December 18, 2008 as the date of the incident because he copied it from the affidavit of Dra. Belo which was filed ahead of everybody else at the NBI. (Ano tawag do'n?  Nangodigo?!)  

He said that according to the security guard's logbook, the correct date was December 12, not December 18.

Here is the TRANSCRIPT of Atty. Tamano's StarTalk interview with Joey De Leon, Ricky Lo, Lolit Solis and Butch Francisco:

Joey: Kasama natin ang legal counsel ni Dra. Vicki Belo, Atty. Adel Tamano, good afternoon. 

Ricky:  Good afternoon, Atty. Tamano.  Adel, sa huling pag-uusap n'yo ni Dra Vicki ... How does she feel about being charged na accessory to the crime na nagawa ni Dr. Kho against Katrina Halili? 

Adel: Well siguro, yung word that will best describe it is, 'Unfair.'  

Unang-una dahil ... although maraming naaawa kay Katrina, 'no, nakakalimutan natin na biktima rin si Dra. Vicki Belo. That she is the one inagawan ng boyfriend ... she is the one na ... in spite of everything still supported Katrina Halili, kept her bilang endorser ng Flawless and yet, ngayon, siya pa'ng pafile-an ng kaso.  

Pangalawa, unfair din dahil kung babasahin mo yung pinayl na kaso nina Katrina, wala talagang ebidensya. Kasi, hindi pwede po sa batas natin, hindi puwede yung mga haka-haka, o yung 'who do you think is the one guilty' ... that's not enough eh. Because under our system of law, kailangan may ebidensiya ka at kailangan maalala natin that ... 

Si Dra. Belo, wala siyang ... the burden of proof to prove she's innocent ... hindi yun na kay Dra. Belo ... hindi niya kailangang iprove na hindi siya nag-upload ng videos.  Ang dapat mag-prove na nag-upload ng video si Dra. Belo is Katrina Halili or Eric Chua.

Lolit:  Pero hindi, Attorney, teka.  Di ba ang isyu lang dapat, yung kung sino kumuha ng sex video?  Kung sino yung gumawa non?  Ba't kung saan-saan na yata napupunta yung kaso?

Adel:  Well, sumasang-ayon ako do'n 'no.  Talaga, the main issue really here is the taking of the sex videos. But kasi ginawa ng isyu yung pagdi-distribute nung videos and ako 'no, it's very clear, hindi ayon sa haka-haka, ayon sa ebidensiya mismo ... it is not Dra. Belo

Joey:  Attorney, ito naman.  May inconsistencies daw sa mga pahayag nitong si Eric, si Bistek at saka si Dra. Belo sa mga pahayag.  Anong masasabi n'yo rito?

Adel: Well, sa 'kin yung inconsistencies talaga is dun sa affidavit ni Eric Chua. 

Kung susuriin n'yo na mabuti, sa simula pa lang, mali na siya. Ang sabi niya ang residence ni Dra. Belo is on Tamarind Street, obviously mali yon. 

Pangalawa, sabi niya, si Dra. Belo asked him to come over to her house para to help her open the computers ... and yet in the same affidavit, sinasabi niya that it was Dra. Belo who gave the password, di ba? So kung ... kung alam niya na yung password, why would she call Eric Chua?

But this is the most important one. Minsan kasi pagka gumagawa ka ng affidavit ... nakalimutan mo that there might be witnesses.  'No?  Ang sabi ni Eric Chua sa affidavit niya ... were that after he downloaded  the videos, nauna siyang umalis sa bahay ni Dra. Belo, hindi po tutoo 'yan.  

Because ang hindi naalala ni Mr. Eric Chua, that everytime you enter Dra. Belo's house, may security guard dun. At yung security ... the security guard will record not just who you are but what time you arrived and what time you left.  

So, we took a look at the logbook 'no at kinausap namin yung mga security guards.  Si Eric Chua arrived at Dra. Belo's house at 5:45 nang hapon, si Dra. Belo umalis ng 7:25 and si Eric Chua left the house at 8:55. Meron pong isang oras at kalahati that it was just Eric Chua with the computer and with the videos. So dun pa lang ... dun pa lang sa affidavit ni Mr. Eric Chua, hindi na tutoo yung sinasabi niya because we have two witnesses, dalawang security guards.  And documentary evidence meaning yung logbook mismo na nagpapakita na hindi tutoo yung sinasabi niya. 

Butch:  And they have the logbook from way back December 2008?

Adel: Yes, we have it in fact, sa affidavit po ni Dra. Belo, we have made it part ... we are submitting yung content ng logbook, yung affidavits ng mga security guards.  

At ito pa!  Nakalimutan ni Mr. Eric Chua. Minsan kasi basta may ginagawa kang isang bagay, nakalimutan mo na baka may witness. Actually, doon po sa restaurant, tulad ng sinabi sa affidavit ni Dra. Belo, pumunta si Eric Chua at dun niya inabot yung ... ah videos.  Which was against the instructions of Dra. Belo.  Dra. Belo's instructions was just to delete all the videos.  

Ang problema kay Mr. Chua is may nakakita sa kaniya. We have a witness, her name is Jacqueline Tang ... she is kakaiba 'no dahil Singaporean po siya ... Singaporean national ... she's not an employee of Belo Medical Group ... she's a consultant ... at nakita po niya na inabot ni Mr. Eric Chua yung video kay Dra. Belo.  So dun pa lang, on our side, meron kaming matibay na ebidensiya to show na yung mga sinasabi po ni  Mr. Eric Chua, hindi tutoo.  So hindi na po ito mga haka-haka, paratang, o pag-aakusa. This is hard evidence.

Butch:  Pero si Dra. Belo ba sisipot dun sa DOJ as per order ng korte?

Adel:  Yes.  At ... well, first, hindi po order ng korte dahil this is still a proceeding sa DOJ. So, tulad ng sinabi namin from the start whether sa DOJ, sa Senate, NBI ... kahit anong imbestigasyon po ... we will cooperate, kung kailangan siyang pumunta don, pupunta siya don dahil walang pong itinatago si Dra. Vicki Belo at ang katotohanan ay inosente siya.  But what the public should remember is that the burden of proof is not on Dra. Belo to prove that she's innocent.  Dapat ang magpapakita ng matibay na ebidensiya ay yung mga nagpaparatang at those who are acccusing Dra. Belo.

Ricky: Atty. Adel, yung na-mention ni Quark sa VTR na nag-attempt si Eric Chua daw na ibenta sa isang istasyon yung video na hawak niya ... May bearing ba 'yon sa kaso?

Adel: May relevance yun ... may bearing yun sa kaso. Pero ako honestly, as a lawyer and someone who has ... I guess started to care about the family of Dra. Belo, I did not want the children to get involved kasi sobra na rin silang masyadong they've experienced so much psychological pain and sufffering from this, parang ayoko na silang masangkot pa o madagdag pa sa kaso.

Butch: Eto naman Lolit, lilipat tayo sa 'yo.  Kasi lumabas na 'yong mahabang version ng audiotape ... I mean, nakahanda ka ba sa posibleng paglabas nung unedited tape?

Lolit: Anytime!  Di ba, wala naman akong dapat katakutan!  Mabuti nga para makita nila kung ano talaga ang context nung pinag-uusapan, di ba? Pero sa 'kin talaga, I can say, wala talagang kinalaman si Vicki!  Kasi, may mga taong nang-iintriga sa 'kin bakit daw lalabas 'yon baka si Vicki nagpalabas. Definitely, si Vicki innocent! 

Adel: If I can add to that, 'no.  Even yung affidavit ni Eric Chua, nung pinapunta ng NBI si Eric Chua a couple of weeks back, hindi siya nag-attend at hindi siya nagsubmit ng affidavit. Kami, nung sinabi ng NBI, 'submit kayo ng affidavit,' nag-submit kami ahead of everyone! Why ahead of everyone?!  Ahead of Dr. Kho, ahead of Eric Chua, dahil wala kaming tinatago! 

Si Mr. Eric Chua only submitted his affidavit, two weeks after everyone has submitted their affidavit. Kaya ang daming ... in fact, even yung date na sinasabi niya when the incident happened, mali!  Dahil kinopya niya yung date from our afffidavit. And after we looked at yung logbook ... inexplain namin sa supplemental affidavit namin na mali pala yung date na December 18.  The incident pala happened December 12 ... ayon dun sa logbook

Kasi minsan, when you interview a witness like Dra. Belo, yung mga dates hindi mo na naaalala masyado eh ... 

Lolit:  The time ...

Adel: ... yung mga oras, ganyan ... but once you see documentary evidence ... eto this is not fabricated ha, this is the logbook of the security company, not Dra. Belo's company, the security company.  Nakita namin December 12 kaya inexplain namin yun yong tunay na date. 

Joey:  Attorney, ano yong susunod n'yong hakbang ni Dra. Belo?

Adel:  Tulad ng sinabi namin. We will cooperate with all the investigation. Nagfile na po kami ng supplemental affidavit sa NBI dahil ine-explain namin maraming butas po yung affidavit ni Eric Chua. Sa DOJ naman, we'll also file an affdidavit and really for us, at the end of the day, basta makita ng tao 'no,  in fact, I will give you a copy of all the affidavits pati lahat ng ebidensiya namin ... basta makita ng tao yung ebidensiya, people will realize that Dra. Belo is the victim here at inosente po siya.

Butch:  Ang pinagtaksilan!

Lolit:  Hindi! Ang kasalanan lang talaga ni Vicki na-inlove siya sa ... ano ba 'yon?  G*go ba tawag do'n?

Butch:  Maling lalaki!

Lolit:  Maling lalaki! I love you Vicki Belo!

Butch:  Ok, Maraming salamat Atty. Adel Tamano and see you in court dahil ko-coveran natin lahat ng bawat hakbang ng mga pangyayaring ito ...

Joey:  Sa aming pagbabalik, makakausap natin ang mga alaga ni Tito Dougaals na sina Richard Gomez, Gelli de Belen at iba pa.  Abangan n'yo po 'yan. Kayo ba'y dadalaw ka ba kay Lolit kung makulong?

Adel:  I will become her lawyer.