Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 587 views

    Aquino V Beltran

    Uploaded by

    krysb2
    1. Former Philippine President Corazon Aquino testified in court against a newspaper columnist, Luis Beltran, who had written that Aquino "hid under the bed" during a 1987 coup attempt, which Aquino said was a "blatant lie". 2. During the court proceedings, Aquino had to follow strict procedural rules when addressing the court and ended each statement with "sir" as the defendant at the witness stand. 3. The defense attorney's cross-examination was limited as the prosecution often objected to questions posed to Aquino, who would respond that the columnist's statements were "substantially" accurate.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Aquino V Beltran

    Uploaded by

    krysb2
    587 views2 pages
    1. Former Philippine President Corazon Aquino testified in court against a newspaper columnist, Luis Beltran, who had written that Aquino "hid under the bed" during a 1987 coup attempt, which Aquino said was a "blatant lie". 2. During the court proceedings, Aquino had to follow strict procedural rules when addressing the court and ended each statement with "sir" as the defendant at the witness stand. 3. The defense attorney's cross-examination was limited as the prosecution often objected to questions posed to Aquino, who would respond that the columnist's statements were "substantially" accurate.

    Original Title

    aquino v beltran

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Former Philippine President Corazon Aquino testified in court against a newspaper columnist, Luis Beltran, who had written that Aquino "hid under the bed" during a 1987 coup attempt, which Aquino said was a "blatant lie". 2. During the court proceedings, Aquino had to follow strict procedural rules when addressing the court and ended each statement with "sir" as the defendant at the witness stand. 3. The defense attorney's cross-examination was limited as the prosecution often objected to questions posed to Aquino, who would respond that the columnist's statements were "substantially" accurate.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    587 views2 pages

    Aquino V Beltran

    Uploaded by

    krysb2
    1. Former Philippine President Corazon Aquino testified in court against a newspaper columnist, Luis Beltran, who had written that Aquino "hid under the bed" during a 1987 coup attempt, which Aquino said was a "blatant lie". 2. During the court proceedings, Aquino had to follow strict procedural rules when addressing the court and ended each statement with "sir" as the defendant at the witness stand. 3. The defense attorney's cross-examination was limited as the prosecution often objected to questions posed to Aquino, who would respond that the columnist's statements were "substantially" accurate.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Krystle Bacani CLED2 Reaction paper

    January 27, 2012

    President Aquino of the Philippines testified before a Manila court hearing her libel case against a popular newspaper columnist, Luis Beltran. Mrs. Aquino said in court that the said columnist wrote a blatant lie and ridiculed her in a column for The Philippine Star. The columnist wrote that Mrs. Aquino had hid under the bed at the height of Government and rebel troops during the 1987 coup attempt. He has since said that we merely using the phrase as a figure of speech. The documentary shown in class was interesting because scheduled to testify for the prosecution was no less than Her Excellency, President Corazon Aquino. It was obvious that the panel for both the defence and the prosecution were careful in addressing the issues before there, considering that it was the President who was at the witness stand. Upon watching the documentary of the high-profile trial of former President Corazon Aquino against publicist Luis Beltran, I was surprised to see the rather comedic trial during the Court Proceeding. The way the defence and the prosecution delivered the trial was quite hilarious because the witness herself, the President at that time, had to adhere to rules of procedure and address the agents of the Court with due respect by ending each statement with sir. The cross-examination conducted by the defence was constricted because almost all the questions addressed to the President was objected to. The President herself would answer to the leading questions thrown at her by responding that the statements alleged to be said by her were substantially accurate. The counsel for the defence, Atty. Coronel was quite adamant on the points he wanted to address. The argument of the prosecution was devoid of merit due to the syllogism reiterated from the said argument. It was said that hiding under the bed was tantamount to an act of cowardice. The first premise was that Mrs. Aquino did not hide under the bed because of the physical impossibility to fit under such bed. Furthermore, the second premise was that hiding under such bed was a cowardice act. Therefore, since she did not hide under the bed, she could not be considered as a coward. The argument was devoid of merit for being illogical. Unfortunately, the class was not able to finish the documentary, though it was reaching an exciting and climactic point. Although from the part which we were able to watch, I believe that the cross-examination of the defence in favour of Luis Beltran was meritorious. It was clear that the cross-examination led to an inference that the syllogistic argument of the prosecution was devoid of merit at that point. It does not mean that hiding under the bed as an expression would amount to cowardice, as this could have been a literary expression by the columnist that could mean otherwise. The trial was interesting because it is rare that the President herself would testify for the prosecution, that alone was entertaining for us especially for those in the field of law. I look forward to watching the rest of the trial in class.

    You might also like