Trying to escape from the hands called "justice"
- or all after everyone watching Janet Napoles denying
in front of the legislators
It is all but stupid to hear her saying "I don't know" especially in front of the legislators.
As people had started to make hashtags, comments, editing pictures of the wrecker herself, Janet Napoles tried to deny anything consistently, feigning ignorance in front of legislators and even the audience knowing that through her lies a truth inconvient to the legislators implicated of the said crime such as stealing public funds.
But, as everyone instead heard her insist her right against self incrimination, or even not to say her name, of saying "I don't know", seems that she is trying to cover up, to the bone so to speak, denying the accusations that includes her name, her establishment, and all of the pseudo-NGOs involved in the controversy.
As according to Rappler:
"Looking impatient, Napoles was noticeably more evasive after lunch break, invoking her right against self-incrimination to avoid most questions. At other times, she mostly responded, in Filipino, with "I don't know" or "I don't remember" or “The case is with the Ombudsman now.”"
That somehow for this writer these examples showed mme. Napoles a desperate case of feigning innocence, ignorance, all despite a number of files that her name, as well as the legislators, her pseudo-NGOs written upon; including those of her daugher who had squander a million peso worth of state funds for her Marie Antoinette-esque lifestyle.
And like any other personality known for denials, Janet Napoles rather kept her controversial secrets firm citing threat as her alibi. She had even condemn some of her former associates, like Benhur Luy as the latter had unraveled her connections related to the issue; but again, in facing the legislators lies the evasiveness, selective memories as according to Guingona III, while Escudero, through an Inquirer article, "wondered why Napoles initially wanted to have an executive hearing with the committee when she would only invoke her right against self-incrimination to many of the questions of the senators."
Enter Miriam, a dash of some catechism and pointing against Enrile
However, as the proceedings continue, and some legislators felt dismayed over Napoles's "tabula rasa" tactics of denial, comes another legislator who is willing to counter the denial in the name of Miriam Defensor-Santiago.
Being a former judge, and stating some of her works used in the proceedings, she somehow knows every gesture what Janet Napoles showed in front of her and the rest of the legislators, as well as laity in the Senate. And knowing that the controversial personality had afford to state she has the right not to be self incriminate, or even "I don't know", Santiago even stated some catechist-like questions knowing that Napoles is also a "devout christian."
One example of her question is that if she observed the ten commandments, especially those of "Ye Shall not Steal" and "Ye Shall not bear false wittness". Napoles somehow said "Yes" to the two questions, but Santiago even said that "She (Napoles) steal and lie". As well as urging her to tell the truth, nonewithstanding the threat that includes those from Enrile, the so-called "Tanda" (old man) whom became Napoles's client.
And again, citing her denials, and some gestures, Santiago and most of the Senators knew how evasive the controversial Napoles did. "She’s beyond evasive, she’s totally distant from the entire proceedings,” Santiago said in a press conference after she grilled Napoles in the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing Thursday accoring to the Inquirer.
Furthermore, Sanitago even thinked that she's also been coached by her lawyers to remain silent or deny in the accusations, or scared citing threats coming from legislators implicated, especially those from Enrile (accdg. to Santiago). For again, according to the Inquirer:
“But her answers are to be expected. She has been coached, maybe by her lawyers … that the less she says, the less trouble she gets into,” Santiago said.
“She doesn’t realize that if she told the whole truth now, her life would be forever free,” she said.
What's next?
Anyways, it's all but strange that Napoles had went to the Senate to have a show of trying hard ignorance over the accusations involving her as well as her retunue. Worse, for a shrewd businesswoman, she kept every transaction as a secret, that she can make an alibi such as having coal mining at Indonesia, that Jeanne's gifts came from her friends, that her money came from her businesses that somehow still unbelievable in the eyes of a common man citing her stealing public funds.
And knowing how evasive Napoles is, then perhaps these legislators who consistently asking asking questions should prepare for another's session. One commentator even suggested that Senators Santiago or Guingona should have come with documents, photos, audio-tape, or any concrete evidence, aside from the testimonies from Benhur Luy, et al. to shatter any denial, or evasiveness on the part of Napoles. There are even newspaper articles as well, including those from the Inquirer how Napoles tried to bribe one of the writers only to be asked by a coterie of those she attempted to bribed on!
And frankly speaking, this writer seems that is Napoles, contrary to her talkative stance during an interview with Monsod, Vitug, et al. This time trying hard to act like those from the banks blocking attempts from the legislators asking about people who had made transactions with her? Santiago is right that her lawyers, or perhaps those who had threatened her advised to deny if not to remain silent.
Yet the more she denies, the more trouble she has to face, such as evidences being prepared amd with witnesses willing to express justifying Napoles as suspect, alongside legislators accused for wrecking!
Napoles may continue denying acusations, or doing a raison circulaire in the proceedings, yet she cannot escape from the hands that is called "Justice."
That's all for now.
Thank you.