Katrina Halili’s lawyer says Katrina never testified that she knew her sexual tryst with Hayden Kho Jr. was being videotaped

Nilinaw ng abugado ni Katrina Halili na si Atty. Raymund Palad ang sinasabing alam ng kanyang kliyente ang pagkuha ni Hayden Kho Jr. ng sex video nila. Ito raw ay konklusyon ng korte at hindi nanggaling kay Katrina.


Kinuha ng PEP.ph (Philippine Entertainment Portal) ang reaksiyon ng abugado ni Katrina Halili, si Atty. Raymund Palad, sa pagbabasura ng Court of Appeals ng kasong Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and Children Act), na isinampa ng aktres laban kay Hayden Kho Jr.

(CLICK HERE to read related story.)

Ayon kay Atty. Palad, una nang na-dismiss ang kasong inihain ni Katrina laban kay Hayden sa Pasig Regional Trial Court Branch 159 noong December 14, 2010.

(Sa bagong reports, ang petsa ng paglabas ang desisyong ito ng Pasig RTC ay January 25, 2011.)

Umapela sa Court of Appeals ang kampo ni Katrina, ngunit nabigo pa rin silang mapausad ang kaso.

Ayon sa inilabas na desisyon ng Court of Appeals, hindi ang pagkakagawa ng sex video ang nagdulot ng “emotional and psychological distress” kay Katrina.

Sabi ng korte, ang pagkaka-upload at pagkakalat ng video sa Internet ang maaari raw dahilan ng distress ng aktres.

Ito ang ibinigay na dahilan ng Court of Appeals upang muling ibasura ang kasong ito.

Taong 2009 nang unang sampahan ni Katrina si Hayden ng kaso ng paglabag sa Anti-Violence Against Women and Children Act (RA No. 9262), matapos kumalat sa Internet ang kanilang sex video.

KATRINA IS NOT AWARE. Nilinaw ni Atty. Palad sa eksklusibong panayam ng PEP sa kanya sa telepono kahapon, August 17, ang sinasabi ng Court of Appeals na alam daw ni Katrina ang pagbi-video sa kaniya ni Hayden.

Sabi ng abugado ng aktres: “Yung alam ni Katrina ang pagre-record ay conclusion ng court.

“Pero hindi ito galing kay Katrina. Conclusion yun ng korte.

“Sinasabi ng korteng imposibleng hindi alam ni Katrina dahil kasi raw, yung camera, malaki, malapit sa TV, at imposibleng hindi niya alam na kinukuhanan siya.

“May dance video sila na—yun, alam ni Katrina.

“Kaya parang ang theory ng court, si Katrina, ‘Imposibleng hindi mo alam?’

“So, iba naman yun sa alam ni Katrina.”

ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW

Ang tinutukoy na dance video ni Atty. Palad ay ang kumalat ding video nina Katrina at Hayden sa Internet, kunsaan nagsasayaw sila sa saliw ng awiting “Careless Whisper.”

Giit ni Atty. Palad, hindi kailanman sinabi ni Katrina sa korte na alam niyang nire-record ni Hayden ang sexual act nila noon at lalong hindi niya sinabi na pinayagan niya ito.

Malinaw raw itong nakasaad sa naunang desisyon na inilabas ng Pasig Regional Trial Court noong 2010:

"The first witness, private complainant, Katrina Irene Pe Halili, testified that the recording by the accused of the sex video was done without her knowledge and consent and that she suffered civil damages as a result of the acts committed by the accused.”

Ito naman ang bahagi ng desisyon kunsaan sa palagay nila ay alam ni Katrina ang pagre-record ng sex video nila ni Hayden:


"The court also observed during the ocular inspection proceedings that when the model camera used to simulate the actual sex video recording was placed in a position so near the television set such that it was partially hidden, the video recorded showed parts of the television set beside it.


“It was only after the camera was positioned in such a way that it was clearly visible that the television set partial impression was no longer recorded.


“Since the actual sex video recording did not show any part of the television set, the camera used must have been placed in a position where it was not hidden from private complainant Halili.


“It is apparent to the court during the ocular inspection that the video camera was placed beside the television set which, as is the nature of the television sets, was situated in a prominent and highly visible portion of the room in relation to the bed where the sexual act occurred.

ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW


“The camera was sufficiently elevated; and not hidden from view as it was directly in front of the bed, and less than six (6) feet away from the same.


“Taking into consideration the nearness and location of the video camera, in addition to the fact that private complainant Halili has knowledge that the accused took video footages of the trysts with her on three previous occasions (although these were not actual acts of coitus, albeit nonetheless sexual revealing), it will be difficult for an impartial mind to persist with the naïve thought that the video recording of their sexual intercourse was unknown to the private complainant.)”


DEMURRER EVIDENCE. Ayon kay Attorney Palad, hindi kailanman naupo sa witness stand si Hayden.

Aniya, “After the prosecution has rested its case, the accused can file a demurrer to evidence, similar to a motion to dismiss the case.”

Ang demurrer to evidence, ayon sa phbar.org, ay “objection or exception by one of the parties in an action at law, to the effect that the evidence which his adversary produced is insufficient in point of law (whether true or not) to make out his case or sustain the issue. The demurrer challenges the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s evidence to sustain a verdict."

Pagpapatuloy ng abugado ni Katrina, “Nag-present kami ng evidence, ang ginawa nila, nag-file sila ng demurrer evidence.

“Hindi umabot sa puntong naupo si Hayden sa korte.

“Sa PRC [Professional Regulation Commission], bawal ang demurrer for evidence. Dahil bawal, hindi nila napa-dismiss.”

Ang tinutukoy ni Atty. Palad ay ang pag-revoke ng PRC ng license ni Hayden bilang medical practitioner.


KATRINA’S REACTION. Tinanong din ng PEP si Atty. Palad kung ano ang naging reaksiyon o damdamin ng kanyang kliyente, ang aktres na si Katrina Halili, sa muling pagkaka-dismiss ng kaso nito laban kay Hayden sa Court of Appeals.

ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW

“Okay lang, mahalaga yung natanggal ang license ni Hayden,” sagot niya.

Ngunit kahit na-dismiss na ng dalawang beses ang kasong isinampa ni Katrina laban kay Hayden, tuloy-tuloy pa rin daw itong isusulong at ilalaban ng kampo ng aktres.

Sabi ni Atty. Palad, “Definitely, magpa-file ng motion for reconsideration sa Court of Appeals, then sa Supreme Court.

“Tapos, at the same time, just today [August 16], nagpadala kami ng letter sa NBI [National Bureau of Investigation] para sa re-investigation ng kaso ng uploading ng video.

“Nakasaad din sa letter ang mga pangalan ng mga taong posible o puwede nilang imbestigahan.”

Ayon sa abugado ni Katrina, mula pa noong 2009 ay apat na beses nang nagpadala ng sulat ang Palad Lauron Tan and Palad Law Firm sa NBI upang hilingin na magsagawa ng imbestigasyon sa mga taong sangkot, o nasa likod, ng uploading ng sex videos.

Pero hanggang ngayon, wala pang nakukuhang sagot sina Atty. Palad at naghihintay pa rin sa sinasabing imbestigasyon na ginagawa ng NBI.

Kaya ang hiling ni Atty. Palad: “Bilisan ang technical aspect ng investigation sa uploading.

“Kung tutuusin, ang daming complainants ng video uploading.

“Three years na kaming waiting, what more pa kaya ang mga ordinaryong tao?

“Taun-taon sumusulat kami para sa re-investigation.”

Nagbigay rin ng mensahe ang abugado ni Katrina para kay Hayden:

“Kung talagang sinasabi niya na biktima rin siya ng uploading, nasira ang buhay niya, bakit hindi siya makipagtulungan sa NBI tungkol sa uploading?

“Paimbestigahan niya ang tao kung sino talaga ang nag-upload.”


WE RECOMMEND


FROM THE SUMMIT MEDIA NETWORK


SPONSORED CONTENT


COMMENTS

Loading comments

THIS JUST IN