Interpol Lists Griffiths, Asks Police To Prepare Extradition

[Markham]

I hate to burst your bubble Garpo but there is NO jury in the Philippine justice system.This link is an article from the head of DOJ, Secretary Leila de Lima explaining thecurrent status: http://forums.abs-cb...HILIPPINES.aspx It has been a lucrative business (under the table) for many corrupt judges, police officialsand the court of appeals to go for the highest bidder. Be it the plaintiff or defendant, itreally doesn't matter. Hard forensic evidence and many eye witnesses are irrelevant --only bribes, witnesses disappearing or paid is the standard operating procedure. Respectfully -- Jake

I was not aware of that. Thanks for pointing that out to me Jake. As I have said before, I am no expert on the Phlippine criminal justice system and because I know it was set up like that of the US I just assumed that that had trial by jury.

Actually the Philippine criminal justice system is "inquisitorial" as it is in Spain (and France too, for that matter). The US justice system is closer to that of the UK (upon which it is based) and is "adversarial". Generally speaking, adversarial systems have juries, inquisitorial systems don't. I would like to pick up on several points you have made in other posts. A defendant is entitled to know all the evidence in advance of his trial. There is a system, know as "disclosure", where both sides exchange evidence, statements etc., that they intend to rely on in court. "Ambushes" - introducing previously undisclosed evidence or undeclared new witnesses during a trial - is not permitted under the Philippine system, such evidence is inadmissible. Similarly, lawyers and Judges in the UK who will advise the British Home Secretary regarding any extradition will require the full facts of the case in order to come to a conclusion as to whether there is a case to answer, or not. They will not hold a trial but rather may hold an inquiry (if the evidence is even strong enough to merit that) with both sides presenting arguments. Once an extradition request (or in this case, a request for "mutual legal assistance") is made, the prosecution can not add further charges. Also, the request must be complete as to the charges the defendant will face at trial. The Philippine Government, knowing that a strong case against Griffiths for murder is likely to result in him being tried in England can not simply make the request for the lesser charge of abduction - for which he can not be tried in the UK - and then proceed to try him for abduction and murder in Cebu. Even when the evidence is seemingly very strong, it can take many years before the Home Secretary agrees to extradite a British citizen. Google "Gary McKinnon" and you'll understand what I mean. In closing, just because the Police say something doesn't necessarily mean that what they state is true. Check today's Cebu newspapers and you'll find reported two cases of PNP corruption. Mark

[Garpo]

I agree that discovery has to be turned over to the defendant before trial or any type of evidencary hearing, but that does not mean it has to be turned over as soon as he is arrested. It is not uncommon for some forensic type evidence to be tested and retested several times before the results are turned over to the defendant. Except for some vary rare circumstances can evidence that was not provided in discovery be presented in a trial. I might also add that just because a defense lawyer or media outlet says something, does not make it true. I have never known a defense attorney that did not say his or her client was not guilty only to be found guilty or even admit guilt at a later time.Until actual court hearing start and accurate court records kept then I would suspect that there will be many things said and alleged that just are not fact.

[Jollygoodfellow]

I have never known a defense attorney that did not say his or her client was not guilty only to be found guilty or even admit guilt at a later time.Until actual court hearing start and accurate court records kept then I would suspect that there will be many things said and alleged that just are not fact.

This reminds me of my late fathers comments, he always said lawyers are nothing but paid lairs. I believe he is correct. :cheers:

[Jake]

I have never known a defense attorney that did not say his or her client was not guilty only to be found guilty or even admit guilt at a later time.Until actual court hearing start and accurate court records kept then I would suspect that there will be many things said and alleged that just are not fact.

This reminds me of my late fathers comments, he always said lawyers are nothing but paid lairs. I believe he is correct. :)

In the Philippines, many lawyers and judges are called "hoodlum in robes".

[Mr Lee]

In closing, just because the Police say something doesn't necessarily mean that what they state is true. Check today's Cebu newspapers and you'll find reported two cases of PNP corruption. Mark

Wow Mark, so using the same logic, if one British citizen has lied to me, then they all might be liars. :) NOT! There happens to be corruption in all walks of life, UK Police corruption probes in 19 forces, POLICE CORRUPTION IN THE UNITED KINGDOM, Police Corruption in England and Wales: An assessment of current evidence, Need I go on, so does all that mean that a person cannot believe the police in the UK either.There are bad apples in every barrel and IMO few if any countries might be exempt, but since I have not dealt with every country, I cannot speak as an authority on the subject, and only know what I have read in the news. Although it does seem strange to me that a person such as yourself, who I believe continually says the news in the Philippines is rarely correct, would then post about something in the news and take that as possibly true. The facts are, when anyone says anything, it does not mean it is necessarily true. It appears that many humans from all countries appear to be corrupt and habitual liars. I personally have a high opinion of those who put their lives on the line to protect the average citizen, be they PNP or other departments, so while many may not have the full benefits of some first world countries, and many of their families may even be starving due to the low pay grade, so therefore some may become corrupt, what are the excuses for those who are corrupt in those first world countries. I feel that if we are to live in, or visit a country, then we should at least try to respect the citizens and those who try to keep that country civil.

[Mr Lee]

Let me add to my above post. It bothers me a lot when I see character assignation of whole groups of people, be it Filipinas, Filipinos, the police, lawyers, judges etc without a qualifier such as some, many etc. I am sorry if I allowed my frustration to show in the above post, but calling any of any whole group bad because of a few is just wrong. It is a slippery slope we go down if we insult whole groups and it might come back to bite us someday. Lets get back to discussing the case. Thank you.

Edited October 21, 2011 by Mr. Lee
add

[Garpo]

It seems to me by some of what I am reading that the UK seems to think it has the right to determine guilt or innocence of a person charged with a crime in another country. I hope that this is not the case and that all that the UK is actually asking for is that they be given enough factual information to warrant the arrest and extradition (turning over) of Griffiths so that he can be held accountable in the country in which the crime is charged and committed. I wonder what the UK would say if a filipino were to visit their country and be suspected to have committed a murder of a child? Would they say that it will be fine with them if the suspect is just charged and tried in the Philippines? What if the Philippines told them that they just do not think that there is enough evidence to convict so therefore refuse to extradite. I am not trying to say that Griffiths is guilty, I am just trying to say that there probably is enough evidence to justify a trial at which his guilt or innocence can be determined. I think some of us are jumping to far ahead of ourselves in saying that just because he is returned to the Philippines to stand trial that he is or will be found guilty. Some of us are also saying that there is no way he could get a fair trial in the Philippines which may or may not be true also.

Edited October 21, 2011 by Garpo

[Markham]

In the case of murder committed abroad, the UK does have the right to try the accused and has had that right since 1861. And, by the way, that right is recognised in international law. But let me ask you this: are you a parent?

Edited October 22, 2011 by Markham

[Markham]

In closing, just because the Police say something doesn't necessarily mean that what they state is true. Check today's Cebu newspapers and you'll find reported two cases of PNP corruption.</p> Mark

Wow Mark, so using the same logic, if one British citizen has lied to me, then they all <strong>might</strong> be liars. <img alt=" :o" class="bbc_emoticon" src="http://philippines-expats.com/public/style_emoticons/default/ohmy.png" /> There happens to be corruption in all walks of life

</p> Lee, you know very well that I am not talking about all Police officers or even all Philippine Police officers. However from the <a href="http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view/20110329-328327/PNP-objects-to-second-most-corrupt-agency-tag">Philippine Daily Inquirer</a> earlier this year:

The latest Pulse Asia survey conducted from Feb. 24 to March 6 said 49 per cent of Filipinos considered the military the most corrupt agency in the wake of the congressional exposé of multi-million-peso funds diverted to line the pockets of former top officials.The PNP came in second, as 26.6 percent of Filipinos considered the police the most corrupt government agency.

and from the <a href="http://wikileaks.org/cable/2005/04/05MANILA1506.html">US Embassy in Manila

According to Transparency International's "2004 Global Corruption Barometer," the Philippine National Police (PNP) is the most corrupt national institution in the Philippines. Corruption in the PNP and related agencies stems primarily from the unholy trinity of gambling, drugs, and prostitution that beset law enforcement organizations worldwide. However, PNP corruption is exacerbated by Philippine law, which gives local officials control over the appointment and dismissal of local PNP commanders, encouraging corrupt city mayors to make common cause with dishonest police commanders.

Okay, admittedly that cable is about six years old. But the wife of a mutual friend (yours and mine) is in the process of joining the PNP on Cebu and, as you may already know, her father is a retired ranking officer and her brother is also a member of that force. She told me quite recently that not only is that cable absolutely true but the situation is just as bad - if not worse - today as it was in 2004/2005. You are absolutely right in countering with examples of bad policing in the UK. We have had a number of incidents involving "bad cops" and when they are discovered, they lose their jobs, their (excellent) pensions and are often prosecuted. Over the last year or two, two or maybe three Chief Constables have been investigated for offences and at least one, the Met's CC, was forced to resign. I am reasonably confident that the US has its own fair share of bad cops too (can you say Rodney King) especially in its big cities. But I hope we can agree that the number of examples of bad policing in any first world country pales into insignificance when compared with those in (some) third world countries. The UK system of jurisprudence has a good system of checks and balances and is one of the few where there is no political influence or interference. Judges are appointed by an independent commission consisting of senior lawyers, brother Judges and laymen. Whilst the State - in the name of the Queen - does prosecute criminal offenders and the trial papers are prepared by a Government department, the Crown Prosecution Service, the cases are argued in Court by independent Barristers on hire by the hour. And of course those trials are before a Jury - as are some civil cases (mostly for libel and defamation) - with all evidence presented as equally valid and weighed as to relevance and importance by those twelve men and women. It is also true that the UK system has had its fair share of miscarriages of justice so no system is one hundred percent perfect but I would argue that our (UK) system is a bit better and fairer than some others. Mark

[Mr Lee]

Mark I had no problem with your above post HERE and in fact found it informative until you added the last line quoted below.

In closing, just because the Police say something doesn't necessarily mean that what they state is true. Check today's Cebu newspapers and you'll find reported two cases of PNP corruption.

The system in the Philippines is something we either decide to live within, or if we do not like it, then why the heck are we in their country. We are not going to change their system anytime soon, so either we agree to live within it, or we should move on. We as forum members can bring about change by posting in such a way that it makes sense to those who read it, but posting in such a way as to insult a whole group of people, be in the whole Cebu police, or any other group, will accomplish nothing but create hatred for foreigners in their country. While I agree there are bad apples, I also know there are many good ones too, and writing that a friends wife is going to become a police officer and tells you that she agrees the whole system is dirty, makes me wonder why she is joining it. Is she joining it to become part of the problem, or to become a honest police officer to set a good example for others. I am sure it is the later, so hopefully she will be one of the good ones and not allow the system to corrupt her, yet having a father in the system and her just joining it, does not make her an expert on it. If he is the same father I have heard about, he is a perfect example of those who refuse to be corrupt. I know all about corrupt police departments in the US, but just because some police officers are corrupt, does not mean all police officers are corrupt and I can tell you that for a fact, there are many many many more clean honest cops than crooked ones. Anyway this topic is about "Interpol Lists Griffiths, Asks Police To Prepare Extradition," so I am not sure what that quoted sentence even had to do with the topic. So while Griffiths may or may not have an excuse for not understanding the system, :o others of us have no excuse and will either have to learn to live within it, or leave, and hiding behind ones country is not the answer IMHO, yet ones country should do all it can to make sure a citizen gets a fair and just trial, but I do not agree that ones country should keep their citizens from standing trial within the country they supposedly committed the crime, unless they are willing to pay the expense of bringing all witnesses, prosecutors, judges and anyone else involved in a trial over to their country to have the trial there, if they insist it must be done on their soil. When we travel to a country, we take our chances of getting in harms way, so it is our decision, and our countries should only makes sure we get fair and just treatment. I have to wonder at what point is it thumbing our noses at others, and therefore saying we are better than them, so we do not have to live within their laws, even when we are living in their country. If the UK insists on having Griffiths trial on their soil, but is not willing to foot the bill to bring everyone over (which we already know they are not) then that sounds like they have put up an outrageous road block to justice, so if that comes to pass, as you say it will, then I believe the Philippines may respond by ejecting all their citizens, or at the very least making examples of the ones they already have in country, or it might get bad for all of us because of this one case. Be careful Mark and others what you ask for by Griffiths and the UK evading Philippine justice, be it even in a system we may not fully trust. None of us may like the backlash. Finally, lets put the shoe on the other foot, how would the UK feel if the opposite were true. I am sure there would be a public cry of indignation. And to answer your question about there being bad in the US police departments, reread my post above, I already wrote "There are bad apples in every barrel and IMO few if any countries might be exempt" so that is a given.