were waiting for the complainant?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
A: Iris, Your Honor.
Q: Mr. Witness, what do you do
whenever
you visit the complainant at their
apartment
and she is not around?
A: I wait for her to come back, Your
Honor.
Q: Where or in what particular part of
the
apartment do you wait?
A: At the living room, Your Honor.
Q: And while waiting, what normally
transpires?
A: I watch the tv or listen to music.
Q: You said earlier that whenever the
complainant is not around during your
visit,
Iris was at the apartment, is that right?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: So there were times that only you
and the
accused were in the apartment, while
you
Q: What transpires whenever you and
the
accused are alone in the apartment?
A: The accused flirts with me, Your
Honor.
Q: What do you mean when you said
she was
flirting with you?
A: She wears revealing clothes, she
says “I
love you” jokingly, mga ganun.
Q: Do you recall how many times these
have
happened?
A: Many times, Your Honor.
Q: What do you tell the accused every
time
she flirts with you?
A: I don’t mind her jokes.
Q: Does your fiancée know of these
instances?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Why?
A: Because I told her a few times about
it.
Q: What did your fiancée say?
A: She said: “Don’t mind her. She’s
crazy.”
Q: Mr. Witness, please examine this text
message, and tell the Court if you
recognize
it?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Why do you recognize it?
A: Because I received that text message
from the accused on August 15, 2007.
Q: This text message purports to have
been
sent by the person owning this mobile
number, 09173237890. Do you
recognize the
person who owned this number?
A: Yes, that is the mobile number of the
accused, Your Honor.
Q: How do you know? A: No. I was about 8 meters away from
A: Because the mobile number of the her.
accused is stored in my mobile phone, Q: Who was with the victim when the
Your incident happened?
Honor. A: She was with the accused.
Q: Will you please read aloud the Q: What did you do when you learned of
contents of the
this text message? incident?
A: “Richie, kung hindi ka magiging akin, A: I rushed to her. She was already lying
walang makikinabang sa’yo!” (“Richie, if on
I the ground.
won’t have you, no one else will!”) Q: What did you do afterwards?
Q: Mr. Witness, kindly read the next text A: I called for an ambulance. We rushed
message. her
A: “Akin ka lang, Richie. Mamamatay to the hospital.
ang Q: How long did you stay with her at the
kahit sinong aagaw sa’yo.” (You’re hospital?
mine, A: About four hours. I waited for the
Richie. Whoever tries to steal you from doctor to
me come out.
will die.”) Q: When the doctor came out, what did
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: Your he
Honor, for the tell you?
record, these text messages appearing A: The doctor said my fiancée was
on poisoned.
the screen of the mobile phone of Mr. PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: No further
Nalupta, previously marked as Exhibit C questions, Your Honor.
has COURT: Cross?
been identified by the witness. ATTY. OCAMPO: Yes, Your Honor
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: This Cross Examination of Richard Nalupta
document is by
the printed copy of the text messages Atty. Analita Ocampo
contained in the mobile phone of Mr. Q: Mr. Witness, you have testified that
Nalupta. We would like to request that it whenever you and Ms. Merin are alone
be in the
marked as Exhibit C-1. apartment, she tried to flirt with you. Is
COURT: Mark it. that
Q: How often does she send you this right?
kind of A: Yes, Your Honor.
text messages? Q: What made you say that?
A: Almost everyday, Your Honor. A: Well, I feel she made some
Q: What were you doing during the advances.
engagement party? ( extra sweetness )
A: I was entertaining our friends. Q: How long have you known Ms.
Q: Were you near the victim? Merin?
A: I have known her ever since I began
courting my fiancée since both of them A: Yes... it’s possible. But Your Honor
live I’m
in the same apartment. That’s about really sure she was the one who sent
four me
years ago. those messages.
Q: Would you consider Ms. Merin as ATTY. OCAMPO: No further questions,
your Your
friend? Honor.
A: Ummm.... Yes. COURT: Re-direct?
Q: Mr. Witness, is it possible that the PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: No, Your
reason Honor.
why Ms. Merin treats you well and with We will call on our last witness.
extra COURT: Call your witness.
sweetness is because she considers Direct Examination of Dr. Juan Paolo
you as a Gascon
close friend since you are the fiancée of by Prosecutor Ayn Sarsaba
her PROSECUTOR SARSABA: I’m calling
best friend? on Dr.
A: Yes... Juan Paolo Gascon.
Q: You also testified that Ms. Merin sent INTERPRETER: Do you swear to tell
you the truth,
threatening text messages. What is you all the truth and nothing but the truth in
proof that it was indeed my client who this
sent case?
you those messages? WITNESS: Yes.
A: I am sure Your Honor because I am COURT: Please state your name and
familiar with the way she constructs her other
messages. personal circumstances.
Q: Mr. Witness, does the complainant WITNESS: Dr. Juan Paolo Gascon, 28
use years of
your mobile phone in sending text age, single, emergency physician and a
messages resident of Robinsons Tower, Padre
to her friends? Faura St.,
A: Yes, sometimes... Ermita, Manila.
Q: How about you? Are there times COURT: Your witness.
when you PROSECUTOR SARSABA: This
borrow the complainant’s cellular witness, Your
phone? Honor, Dr. Juan Paolo Gascon, will
A: Yes, there are times I use her phone. testify on
Q: So, is it possible that Ms. Merin’s the findings in the medico-legal report
phone prepared by him to prove the following:
has also been borrowed by someone (i)
else that the effective cause of the
and it was not her who sent you those complainant’s
text condition is chemical poisoning; (ii) that
messages? the
dose taken by the complainant is seminars on emergency medicine held
necessarily here
fatal; and (iii) that the possible source of and abroad. In fact, I have also been
the invited
cyanide poison is the grape fruit juice as a guest speaker to give special
prepared by the accused. May we lectures
proceed, on modern medical toxicology and the
Your Honor? medico-legal aspect of poisoning. To
COURT: Proceed. name a
Q: You declared that you are a doctor of few: One of the international medical
medicine, Dr. Gascon, where did you conferences I’ve attended was in
finish Switzerland
your medical degree? last October 2007 called Poisoning and
A: Emilio Aguinaldo College, United Drug
Nations Overdose by Dr. Barry Rumack and Dr.
Avenue, Manila. Allan
Q: When did you graduate? Hall who were internationally recognized
A: 1994? experts in internal medicine. Another
Q: Are you a licensed physician? would
A: Yes. be the one held just last January in
Q: When did you pass the doctor’s Florida,
board USA entitled Emergency Medicine:
examination? Practicing
A: in 1995. According to the Evidence.
Q: Where are you presently connected? Q: Have you testified as a Medical
A: I’m presently connected with the expert in
Philippine General Hospital located in cases before courts of justice?
Taft, A: Yes, mostly on medico legal cases.
Manila. Q: How many medico legal cases so far
Q: Since when have you been employed have
in you testified? What kind of medico legal
that hospital? cases have you testified?
A: I have been employed there since A: For the past 5 years, around two
1998. hundred
Q: What is your present designation? (200) cases. Mostly homicide and
A: I’m presently an emergency physician murder
in cases involving food and chemical
said institution. poisoning,
Q: Since you became a licensed medical malpractice cases and industrial
physician, and
have you attended seminars and vehicular accidents.
undertaken Q: Do you recall having attended on one
training in connection with the practice Catherine Jane Manarang at the
of Philippine
medicine? When and where? General Hospital?
A: Yes. I have attended several training A: Yes.
Q: Do you recall when was that doctor? Q: Attached to the record of the case is
About what time? a
A: About 6:30 in the evening of October Medico Legal Report issued by one Dr.
17, Juan
2007. Paolo Gascon, is this the one you are
Q: Do you recall how many days was referring to? (Exhibit D)
she A: Yes.
confined to the hospital? PROSECUTOR SARSABA: For the
A: She was confined for one week. record, the
Q: Why was she confined that long? witness has identified the document
A: We made sure that the neurologic previously marked as Exhibit D as the
and Medico
cardiovascular status has normalized Legal Report issued by Dr. Juan Paolo
and Gascon.
acidosis and other metabolic Q: There is a signature above the
abnormalities typewritten
have resolved before we discharged name Dr. Juan Paolo Gascon, do you
her. know
Q: While in the hospital, did you whose signature is this doctor?
continue A: It is my signature.
attending on her? PROSECUTOR SARSABA: I
A: Yes. respectfully
Q: After her discharge, did you require request Your Honor, that the signature
her to appearing in Exhibit D be marked as
still see you for further medications? Exhibit
A: Yes, Your Honor. D-1.
Q: Why? COURT: Mark it.
A: I advised the patient to have a follow- Q: Doctor, please read this particular
up entry.
within 7 to 10 days after discharge to (Witness reading a portion of the medico
reevaluate and monitor for onset of legal report)
delayed A: The patient came in the emergency
neurologic manifestations. room
Q: Did the patient see you for a follow- stretcher-borne, unconscious and in
up respiratory distress. Her vital signs then
Doctor? were: Blood pressure 80/50 mmHg,
A: Yes. Cardiac
Q: Did you find any neurologic rate of 50 beats per minute, Respiratory
complications Rate
in said follow-up? of 12 cycles per minute and temperature
A: None. of
Q: So Doctor, we are assured that the 37.8 degree Celsius. Patient’s skin was
patient, complainant herein, is in a flushed.
healthy Q: Could you please explain this finding
state of mind? in
A: Yes.
more simple terms for an ordinary
person to
understand?
A: The patient clearly was in an unstable
condition, or in a very critical condition,
warranting an immediate medical
intervention, constant monitoring for any
sign of deterioration and further
evaluation.
Q: Do you know what could have
caused this
kind of condition?
A: My diagnosis at that time was there
was
chemical poisoning.
Q: Why is the condition of Catherine
Jane
Manarang attributable to poisoning
rather
than to disease or some natural cause?
Were
tests conducted confirming the
existence of
poisoning?
A: We did Toxin Screening with the
patient’s
blood. It revealed the presence of trace
amounts of cyanide in the blood, and
since
cyanide is not normally found in our
blood
and considering its chemical nature, it is
poisonous.
Q: So you are saying that the actual or
effective cause of the condition of the
patient is...?
A: Chemical poison, which is harmful to
the
body or deadly to humans.
Q: Did the symptoms which appear
resemble
the typical symptoms of poisoning by
the
alleged poison?
A: Yes. The symptoms of cyanide
poisoning
are headache, nausea, vomiting,
generalized
body weakness, loss of consciousness,
flushed skin, and unstable vital signs –
all of
which are present in this case.
Q: Doctor, what could be a possible
source of
cyanide in this case?
A: Based on the history given to me by
the
informant when the patient was brought
to
the ER, possible sources of cyanide
could be
any of the food or beverage the patient
had
ingested on the day of the incident.
Q: History? What do you mean by that
Doctor?
A: We fill out a form called History and
Physical Examination. Contained here
are the
General Data, Reason for the Consult or
Chief Complaint, the History of Present
Illness and the Past Medical History.
Relevant
here is the History of Present Illness.
This
refers to the events and activities of the
patient which transpired prior to the
consultation, from the onset of
symptoms to
the time of consultation.
Q: Now, you mentioned about an
informant.
Who was the informant of the patient in
this
case, Doctor? Was it Miss Merin?
ATTY. TAPIRE: Objection, Your Honor,
the
question is leading!
Q: Who was the informant of the patient
in
this case?
A: It was Miss Iris Merin.
Q: Would you please tell the Court what
it
was exactly that Miss Merin told you?
A: The informant told me that during
their
coffee break on the day of the incident,
the
food intake of the patient consisted of
tuna
sandwich, fresh green salad, green tea
frappuccino, and during the party, she
drank
coke zero.
Q: Now, my question to you is: Is it
possible
Doctor that a grape fruit juice can be a
source of the cyanide poison?
ATTY. TAPIRE: Objection, the question
is
leading.
Court: Sustained.
A: Actually, during the confinement of
the
patient in the hospital for one week, said
patient mentioned to me that she also
drank
grape fruit juice. It is possible that the
grape
fruit juice could be the source of cyanide
considering that she ingested the same
3 the body is usually proportional to the
hours before the onset of symptoms.
Q: What is the minimum lethal dose of
cyanide?
A: Fatal dose is the smallest dose
known to
cause death: not the smallest amount
which
will certainly cause death. Several
scientific
studies have shown that the toxic
threshold
dose is 50 to 100mg of cyanide in the
human
body.
Q: In your opinion, was the dose taken
by the
victim necessarily fatal?
A: An analysis of the patient’s blood
would
tell us the amount or level of cyanide in
the
blood. The patient’s blood was found to
have
1.5 mg/dL cyanide content. Based from
this
definitive finding, I can extrapolate that
the
amount ingested by the patient is lethal
or
fatal.
Q: Is that all, Doctor?
A: As previously stated, the symptoms
of the
patient would eventually lead to cardio-
pulmonary arrest (death). If no prompt
intervention was done, the patient would
have died.
Q: What are you trying to tell us Doctor?
A: The severity of the symptoms may
serve
as an indication of how lethal the dose
of
cyanide is. Or that the effect of poisons
in
dose
taken. The bigger the dose, the more
severe
the symptoms will be.
Q: Doctor, do you have any other field of
expertise?
A: Yes. I am also an expert chemist and
toxicologist. I specialize in Forensic
Medicine
and Toxicology specifically Poisoning
and
Drug Overdose.
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: I will show
you a
document, previously marked as Exhibit
E.
This is the Toxicology Report from the
NBI on
the results of their chemical analyses of
the
sample taken from the grape fruit juice
in the
pitcher and of the sample taken from the
rodenticide or rat killer, Rat-A-Rest,
found in
the apartment of the complainant and
accused.
Q: As an expert, can you please
interpret to
us the findings in this report?
A: This report reveals that the sample
taken
from the grape fruit juice has been
contaminated with rodenticide. It also
shows
that rodenticide has 50% cyanide
concentration. It also illustrates that the
grape fruit juice is hence contaminated
with
cyanide.
Q: Doctor, have you formed an opinion?
A: It seems that the rodenticide has
been
intentionally mixed into the grape fruit
juice.
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: No more
questions,
Your Honor.
COURT: Cross?
ATTY. TAPIRE: Yes, Your Honor.
Cross Examination of Dr. Juan Paolo
Gascon
by Atty. Paulette Tapire
Q: Doctor, you have testified that you
also
specialize in Toxicology specifically
Poisoning
and Drug Overdose, hence, you are an
expert in that field, am I right?
A: Yes.
Q: Doctor, when does ingestion of the
cyanide poison cause the onset of
symptoms
of cyanide poisoning?
A: Patients who ingest potentially fatal
amounts may not develop life-
threatening
symptomatology for up to 1 to 2 hours
following exposure.
Q: Symptoms such as?
A: In patients who do not experience
sudden
collapse, the initial signs and symptoms
can
resemble those of anxiety or
hyperventilation syndrome. Early signs
include headache. Late signs of
poisoning
are nausea, vomiting, loss of
consciousness,
and a variety of cardiac effects.
Q: The patient-complainant also testified
that
she drank two glasses of the alleged
source
of the poison – the grape fruit juice – at
around 2:45 pm and the onset of the
symptoms of cyanide poisoning was
about
6:00 pm. Thus, 3 hours had lapsed from
the
ingestion of the alleged source (grape
fruit
juice) before the symptoms developed,
am I
right?
A: Yes.
Q: But you also said that symptoms of
cyanide poisoning are expected to
develop 1
to 2 hours following ingestion?
A: Yes.
Q: If that’s the case, don’t you think
there is
an inconsistency of the duration of
ingestion
and onset of symptoms between the
patient’s actual case and the
established
scientific findings of cyanide poisoning?
With
this, does it not mean that the condition
of
the patient can not be attributed to
cyanide
poisoning but to some other cause?
A: Yes. That is possible.
Q: Are you sure?
A: I can say that it is possible that the
patient’s condition was not due to
cyanide
poisoning.
Q: Doctor, about the source of the
poison,
you only said possible sources, right?
A: Yes.
Q: By possible, you mean...?
A: Probable or potential source of the
poison,
Ma’am.
Q: That the grape fruit juice is just one
possible source of the cyanide poison?
A: Yes.
Q: And that there are other possible
sources
of the cyanide as well?
A: Yes.
Q: So, is it safe to conclude, Doctor, that
the
cyanide poison may have come from
another
source considering that for that day, the
patient’s food intake comprised of
different
food and beverages?
A: Yes, that is possible.
Q: Are you aware of the history of said
patient, that she had at one time in the
past,
attempted to end her life due to
depression?
A: Yes.
Q: That she has a history of one
previous
suicidal attempt one year from the date
of
the incident?
A: Yes.
Q: In your opinion, is said fact relevant
to the
determination of the cause of the
symptoms?
A: Yes. History of any previous suicidal
attempts, history of the patient’s mental
condition and history of business,
marital
and social failures are taken into
consideration in cases of poisoning.
Q: Is it safe to conclude then that it is
possible that the poisoning is
attributable to
suicide?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
ATTY. TAPIRE: No further questions,
Your
Honor.
COURT: Re-direct?
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: Yes, Your
Honor
Re-Direct Examination of Dr. Juan
Paolo
Gascon by Prosecutor Sarsaba
Q: Doctor, is it possible that the onset of
symptoms for cyanide poisoning varies
for
each person? Is it possible that said
symptoms may appear beyond the
normal 1-
2 hour duration?
A: That is possible.
Q: Will you explain to us how that is
possible?
A: Some persons possess different
levels of
sensitivity to certain substances. The
body
may acquire tolerance to some
substances.
Another would be: The body has a
natural
defense against cyanide exposure in the
form of an endogenous enzyme,
namely,
rhodanese. This enzyme catalyzes
cyanide
complexing with sulfur, forming the
much
less toxic ion thiocyanate. The
availability of
sulfur constitutes the rate limiting factor
in
natural cyanide detoxification. In the
absence of exogenous source of sulfur,
rhodanese activity is too slow to prevent
serious toxicity or death.
Q: Could you explain to the Court what
you
mean by that Doctor?
A: Even though the normal duration is 1
to 2
hours, there are some cases in which
the
signs and symptoms of cyanide
poisoning in
a patient may be delayed and appear
beyond the normal duration. In the case
of
the patient Miss Manarang, there was a
one-
hour delay of appearance of symptoms
because as confirmed in her lab tests,
her
body produces abnormal amounts of
sulfur
and as I’ve mentioned earlier, when
there is
more sulfur in the body, the cyanide
detoxification in the body is hastened,
thus,
the serious toxic effects of cyanide will
be
diminished. Lastly, the food intake of the
patient may possibly contribute to such
effect.
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: No further
questions, Your Honor.
COURT: Re-cross?
ATTY. TAPIRE: No re-cross, Your
Honor.
COURT: Mr. Witness, you may step
down.
Formal Offer of Evidence by the
Prosecution
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: Your
Honor, we are
now resting the case for the
prosecution.
COURT: How do you intend to submit
your
formal offer?
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: We can
now offer
our evidence, Your Honor.
COURT: Proceed
PROSECUTOR SARSABA:
Exhibit A is the Contract of Lease
being offered to prove that there is a
stipulation on the quarterly conduct of
pest
control measures by the lessor.
Exhibit A-1 and A-2 are the
signatures of Catherine Jane Manarang
as
lessee and Rhandell Matuloy as lessor
to
prove that these two persons were the
contracting parties to the lease
agreement.
Exhibit A-3 is the stipulation
regarding the pest control measures to
prove
that the lessor undertakes to conduct
the
quarterly pest control measures.
Exhibit B is the pitcher from which a
sample was taken and subjected to prove the source of the poison which
chemical was
analysis for the purpose of proving the bought by the accused.
fact COURT: Any comment?
that the source of poison was the ATTY. OCAMPO:
grapefruit As to Exhibits A, A-1, A-2 and A-3 we
juice prepared by the accused contained admit
in the existence and authenticity, Your
the pitcher. Honor.
Exhibit C consists of text messages to As to Exhibit B, we admit its
prove that the accused nurtured feelings existence but not its purpose.
for As to Exhibits C and C-1, we can only
the complainant’s boyfriend. admit
Exhibit C-1 consists of printed copies as to the existence of the text messages
of the text messages to corroborate to but
the not its authenticity.
fact that the accused had been sending As to Exhibit D and D-1, we admit the
several text messages to the existence and authenticity, Your Honor.
complainant’s As to Exhibit E, we admit its authenticity
boyfriend to manifest her obsession. and
Exhibit D is the Medico Legal Report genuineness.
issued by Dr. Juan Paolo Gascon to As to Exhibit F, we admit its existence
prove the but
following: (i) that the effective cause of not its purpose.
the COURT: Acting on the formal offer of
complainant’s condition is chemical exhibits
poisoning; (ii) that the dose taken by the of the prosecutor and comments
complainant is necessarily fatal; and (iii) thereon by
that the defense counsel, the Court resolves
the possible source of cyanide poison is to
the admit all the exhibits offered by the
grapefruit juice prepared by the defense
accused. counsel specified in the offer.
Exhibit D-1 is the signature of Dr. DEFENSE
Juan Paolo Gascon to be a part of his Direct Examination of Dr.Leira Taruc by
testimony that he was the attending Atty.
physician of the complainant. Helen Paulette Tapire
Exhibit E is the Toxicology Report of ATTY. TAPIRE: For the defense, we are
the National Bureau of Investigation to ready
prove to present our first witness, Your Honor.
the chemical analysis of the sample COURT: Proceed.
taken INTERPRETER: Do you swear to tell
from the pitcher for qualitative and the truth,
quantitative determination of the poison. all the truth and nothing but the truth in
Exhibit F is the Box of Rat Killer to this
case?
WITNESS: Yes Ma’am. A: For almost 10 years, Your Honor.
COURT: Please state your name and Q: What is the nature of your work as a
other psychiatrist?
personal circumstances. A: As a psychiatrist I deal with the
WITNESS: I am Dr. Leira Leonor Taruc, diagnosis,
35 treatment and prevention of mental and
years old, single, a licensed psychiatrist emotional illness and behavioral
at disorders of
the Psychiatry Department, Medical patients.
Center Q: How do you treat your patients?
Manila, and a resident of 123 Krusada A: I listen and talk to patients about their
St. mental, emotional or behavioral
Quaipo, Manila. problems
ATTY. TAPIRE: Your Honor, the witness and assess the status of these
is disorders. I
presented to testify on the medical also prescribe medications, cognitive
records therapy, behavioral therapy or
of the complainant who underwent psychological
several counseling depending on the patient’s
counseling sessions under her needs.
supervision Q: Do you know the complainant in this
and to prove the mental and emotional case?
instability of the complainant. May we A: Yes, Your Honor.
proceed, Your Honor? Q: Why do you know her?
COURT: Proceed. A: She was my patient at the Psychiatry
Q: When were you admitted to the Department of Medical Center Manila.
practice Q: When was this?
of medicine? A: August 16, 2006.
A: In 1995, Your Honor. Q: For what reason did she come to
Q: From what university or college did your
you clinic?
graduate and when? A: She consulted me about her
A: I graduated from the University of condition.
Santo Q: Was the consultation out of her own
Tomas in the year 1994. volition?
Q: Did you graduate with honors? A: No. She was advised by her friend.
A: Yes, Latin Honors Your Honor. Q: Doctor, what procedures or tests did
Q: Do you have any post-graduate you
degree? conduct on the complainant during the
A: Yes, Your Honor. I finished my consultation?
Master of A: I conducted physical examinations. I
Psychiatry degree at the University of asked her to tell something about her,
Melbourne in 1998. her
Q: Since when have you been practicing work, her family, and other personal
as a relationships. I just listened to whatever
psychiatrist? she
said. While she was talking, I observed
her
demeanor, the way she spoke, and her
gestures.
Q: What did you notice about the
complainant while she was talking to
you?
A: At first, the patient was apparently
normal. But when she began talking
about
her family, particularly her parents, she
began to sob, and then she cried. Her
hands
were trembling. She blamed herself for
the
death of her parents.
Q: What matters were revealed to you
by the
complainant in the course of the
consultation?
A: The physical examinations revealed
sleeping apnea, insomnia, hypertension,
and
migraines.
Q: As to her emotional condition?
A: The patient is suffering from major
depression, without psychotic features.
Q: Did you talk to anyone else regarding
the
patient’s emotional condition?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Who else did you talk to about her
emotional condition?
A: I spoke to her friend, the one who
advised
the patient to seek help. This was part of
the
analysis of the patient’s condition.
Q: Any other tests that you conducted
on the
patient?
A: No more, Your Honor.
Q: Doctor, from the examinations and
observations, what did you conclude
about
the complainant’s condition?
A: The patient from suffered from single
episode depression.
Q: Will you explain to this Court what
that
condition meant?
A: Single episode depression or SED is
a type
of major depression that occurs once,
as a
result of a single psychological trauma.
In
the case of the patient, based on our
conversations, the only traumatic event
which caused the depression was the
terrible
accident and death of her parents.
Q: What made you conclude that the
patient
was suffering from this condition?
A: The symptoms of SED, which include
insomnia, loss of appetite, which may,
or
may not lead to weight loss, mood
swings
and hypnotic spells, matched with the
results
of the patient’s physical examination.
Q: How did you treat the patient?
A: The patient was admitted to the
hospital
as inpatient.
Q: How long did she stay at the
hospital?
A: One month, Your Honor.
Q: And what methods or procedures did
you
use to treat the patient?
A: I conducted supportive counseling,
Your
Honor.
Q: Will you tell this Honorable Court
what
supportive counseling meant?
A: Supportive counseling helps ease the
pain
of depression and addresses the feeling
of
hopelessness that accompanies the
depression. In the case of the patient, I
talk
to her about what happened to her
during
the past week. If the patient mentioned
a there
negative event, I ask her what she felt,
why
she felt that way and how she should
have
viewed the negative situation.
Q: And the counseling sessions were at
what
intervals?
A: Once a week, Your Honor.
Q: Did you prescribe any medication to
the
patient?
A: Yes, I prescribed anti-depressant
pills.
Q: When did you discharge the
complainant/
patient?
A: September 16, 2006, Your Honor.
Q: The medical findings that you had on
the
complainant, were these reduced into
writing?
A: Yes, Your Honor, I have made a
psychiatric
assessment on the medical findings.
Q: Did you personally prepare the said
writing?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Does this document have any
relation to
the report that you have prepared?
(Showing
the psychiatric assessment)
A: That is the report that I have
prepared,
Your Honor.
ATTY. TAPIRE: For the record, the
witness has
identified this document previously
marked
as Exhibit 2 as the psychiatric
assessment
record of Catherine Jane Manarang.
Q: In the last page of this document,
appears a signature. Whose signature is
this,
Miss Witness?
A: That is my signature, Your Honor.
ATTY. TAPIRE: I respectfully request,
Your
Honor, that the signature appearing in
this
document be marked as Exhibit 2-A.
COURT: Mark it.
Q: Doctor, who ordered the discharge of
the
complainant?
A: I ordered the discharge, Your Honor,
upon
request of the complainant?
Q: Were there any conditions upon the
discharge of the complainant?
A: In my discharge summary, I stated
that
although the patient is being discharged,
she
is to continue treatment as an
outpatient.
Q: Did the patient comply with the
condition?
A: No, Your Honor. She did not return to
the
hospital after the discharge.
Q: Doctor, when the complainant was
discharged, what was her condition?
A: There was an improvement in her
condition in general, although she is not
completely stable yet.
Q: What do you mean she is not
completely
stable yet?
A: While she manifested improvement,
there
is a possibility of relapse.
Q: Do you mean to say, Doctor, that the
patient’s condition may recur?
A: If unguarded, Your Honor.
Q: Unguarded...?
A: If the patient does not follow the
treatment plan, the possibility of relapse
is
high.
Q: Do you mean to say, Doctor, that, in
the
case of the complainant, there is a
possibility
of a relapse, considering she did not
return
to you for further treatment?
A: Yes, Your Honr.
Q: And should there be a relapse, would
another suicide be also a possibility?
A: That is possible, Your Honor.
ATTY. TAPIRE: No further questions,
Your
Honor.
COURT: Cross?
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: Yes, Your
Honor.
Cross Examination of Dr. Leira Taruc by
Prosecutor Ayn Sarsaba
Q: Doctor, you testified that you treated
the
complainant for single episode
depression. Is
that true?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: When you discharged the
complainant,
what was her condition?
A: She was emotionally stable.
Q: What made you conclude that the
patient
was emotionally stable?
A: During our last counseling session,
there
were no longer signs of the SED. She
no
longer showed signs of mood swings.
She no
longer cried when I asked her about the
death of her parents. She said she
would not
blame herself anymore.
Q: You also testified that your
relationship
with the complainant lasted for one
month.
Will you tell this Honorable Court why it
lasted only for such period?
A: The patient responded well during
our
counseling sessions. The anti-
depressant
pills which I have prescribed also
worked
positively on her.
Q: The anti-depressant pills that you
prescribed; do they have any side
effects?
A: I asked the patient what she felt after
taking the medication. She said she felt
drowsy, which is a normal side effect of
anti-
depressants.
Q: Are there any other side effects?
A: Other anti-depressants make a
patient
restless and anxious. But the effects
really
vary from one person to another. In the
case
of the complainant, the only effect was
drowsiness.
Q: You testified that a relapse is
possible if
the patient does not continue treatment
after
discharge, is that true?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: How high are the chances of a
relapse?
A: It depends, Your Honor.
Q: Depends on what?
A: If the patient is under several
medications
and they are not followed, a relapse is
highly
possible. And if the patient does not
submit
to further counseling sessions when
required, a relapse is also possible.
Q: Was the complainant under
medication
when she was discharged?
A: Yes, but only for anti-depressant,
Your
Honor.
Q: So in your opinion, is the possibility
of a
relapse high or low?
A: I cannot tell, Your Honor.
Q: Would that also mean that, in the
case of
the complainant, such relapse may not
happen?
ATTY. TAPIRE: Objection, Your Honor,
the
question is leading.
COURT: Sustained.
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: No further
questions, Your Honor.
COURT: Re-direct?
ATTY. TAPIRE: No, Your Honor. We will
call on
our last witness.
COURT: Miss Witness, You may step
down.
Call your last witness.
Direct Examination of Kate Nunez by
Atty.
Analita Ocampo
ATTY. OCAMPO: May I call on our next
witness, Miss Kate Nunez.
INTERPRETER: Do you swear to tell
the truth,
all the truth and nothing but the truth in
this
case?
WITNESS: Yes Ma’am.
COURT: Please state your name and
other
personal circumstances.
WITNESS: I am Kate Nunez, 32 years
old,
married, an officemate of the
complainant
and a resident of 345, Paco, Manila.
ATTY. OCAMPO: The witness is being
presented to testify on the character and
suicidal tendencies of the complainant.
May
we proceed, Your Honor?
COURT: Proceed.
Q: Do you know the complainant?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Why do you know her?
A: I work with her at the accounting
department at Nestle Philippines.
Q: How long have you been
officemates?
A: About two years.
Q: How would you describe her as an
officemate?
A: She is a quiet person, a loner.
Q: In the two years that you’ve known
the
complainant, was there any untoward
incident which involved her?
A: None sir.
Q: Was there any time that you noticed
something different about the
complainant?
A: Yes.
Q: What was that?
A: I saw her one time at the comfort
room,
she was crying while staring at the
mirror.
Q: What did you do when you saw her
crying?
A: I asked her if something wrong
happened.
Q: What was her answer?
A: She said, “I wanna die!”
Q: What did you tell her after she said
those
words?
A: I asked her again what happened
Q: And what was her answer?
A: She did not say anything, she just
stared
at me.
Q: What was your reaction?
A: I said, “Come on, you can tell me
your
problems.”
Q: Did this kind of incident happen
again?
A: Yes. Two days after, the same
incident
happened in the comfort room.
Q: What did you do during that second
incident?
A: None. I did not ask her anymore
because I
know she wouldn’t tell me anyway.
Q: Do you remember what transpired
afterwards?
A: After about three days, I learned of
the
complainant’s attempt to commit
suicide.
Q: Miss Witness, on June 22, 2006, did
you
receive an e-mail from the complainant?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Who was the sender of that e-mail?
A: It was Catherine, Your Honor.
Q: How do you know?
A: Because she used her signature,
Your
Honor.
Q: Miss Witness, please examine this
writing,
and please tell the Court if you
recognized it?
A: That is the e-mail sent by the
complainant, Your Honor.
ATTY. OCAMPO: For the record, the
witness
has identified this document previously
marked as Exhibit A as the printed copy
of
the e-mail sent by the complainant.
Q: Can you tell the Court what the e-
mail
contained?
A: It says: “Dear Kate, my parents didn’t
deserve to die that way. I am so stupid, I
should have died with them. I wanna die
now!”
Q: How sure are you that this is the
same e-
mail which you received from the
complainant?
A: Because her signature appears at the
bottom of the e-mail, Your Honor.
Q: This signature appearing here, is this
the
signature of the complainant?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
ATTY. OCAMPO: Your Honor, it is
respectfully
requested that the signature appearing
in
this Exhibit 3 be marked as Exhibit 3-A.
ATTY. OCAMPO: No further questions.
COURT: Cross?
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: No cross-
examination for the witness, your honor.
Direct Examination of Iris Victoria Merin
by
Atty. Helen Paulette Tapire
ATTY. TAPIRE: For the defense, we are
ready
to present the accused, Your Honor.
COURT: Proceed.
INTERPRETER: Do you swear to tell
the truth,
all the truth and nothing but the truth in
this
case?
WITNESS: Yes Ma’am.
COURT: Please state your name and
other
personal circumstances.
WITNESS: Iris Victoria Uy Merin, 28
years of
age, single, food toxicologist at the
Research
and Development Division Nestle
Philippines,
and a resident of Unit 143 Astral
Apartment
Padre Faura St. Ermita, Manila.
COURT: Your witness.
ATTY. TAPIRE: Your Honor, the
testimony of
the witness is being offered to controvert
the
material allegations of the information
against Iris Victoria Merin and to testify
that
due to the complainant’s mental and
emotional state, her perspective of the
situation cannot be relied upon. May we
proceed, Your Honor?
COURT: Proceed.
Q: Miss Witness, are you the same Iris
Victoria Merin who is the accused in this
case?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Do you know the complainant?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Do you know her personally?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: How are you related to her?
A: She is a childhood friend. We work in
the
same company and we live in the same
apartment.
Q: Iris Merin, please tell this Honorable
Court,
where were you on October 17, 2007 at
around 6pm?
A: I was at the engagement party of
Catherine and Richard.
Q: Can you recall what happened during
that
engagement party?
A: I was chatting with Catherine while
having
a drink. We were in the kitchen then.
Afterwards, I saw her holding her
abdomen
and vomiting.
Q: What were you drinking that time?
A: I was drinking margarita, she was
drinking
Coke zero.
Q: Then what happened?
A: She dropped to the ground. She was
so
pale and sweaty. She lost her
consciousness.
Ritchie called for an ambulance and
then we
brought her to the nearby hospital.
Q: How long did you stay at the
hospital?
A: I stayed there overnight.
Q: Before the incident happened, where
were
you?
A: I was at the Starbucks with
Catherine.
Q: At around what time was that?
A: It was around 3pm. It was my coffee
break
then.
Q: Did Catherine go to work that day?
A: No, Your Honor.
Q: Would you know why?
A: She told me she would take a leave
because she needed to prepare for their
engagement party.
Q: Did you go to work that day?
A: Yes.
Q: What time did you leave the house?
A: I left the house 6:30 am.
Q: So could you positively say that you
had
no idea about what transpired on that
day,
October 17, 2007, before the incident at
the
engagement party happened?
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: Objection,
Your
Honor! The question is leading.
COURT: Sustained.
Q: When you left the house, what was
Catherine doing?
A: She was still sleeping, Your Honor.
Q: Miss Witness, were you aware that
the
complainant suffered from a major
depression?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Would you know the reason why she
suffered from that depression?
A: Because she couldn’t accept the
untimely
death of her parents. She blamed
herself for
their death.
Q: When did her parents die?
A: Around May of 2006.
Q: After the death of the complainant’s
parents, what happened to the
complainant?
A: She became insomniac. There were
nights
that she couldn’t sleep. She also drank
liquor
more often. She began to lose weight.
There
were also mood swings, particularly in
the
afternoon. There were times that she
would
just cry. Sometimes she just keeps quiet
and
not talk to me.
Q: Did the complainant remain that
way?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: For how long did she remain that
way?
A: I think around two months, before she
attempted to end her life.
Q: When did she attempt to commit
suicide?
A: Around July or August 2006, Your
Honor.
Q: After she committed suicide, what
happened?
A: She sought the help of a psychiatrist.
Q: Did you advise her to seek medical
help?
A: No, Your Honor, because I was afraid
she’d say I think she’s crazy.
Q: Did you do anything to help her?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: What did you do to help her in her
condition?
A: I was always talking to her, asking
her
how she feels, I kept telling her not to be
depressed anymore. I also told her to
stop
drinking.
Q: After she sought the help of a
psychiatrist,
what happened?
A: Catherine recovered from the
depression.
She was sleeping well and was no
longer
drinking often.
Q: No more signs of the depression
were
present?
A: Hmm, sometimes she suddenly kept
quiet.
There were times I caught her crying
silently.
ATTY. TAPIRE : No further questions,
Your
Honor.
COURT: Cross?
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: Yes, Your
Honor.
Cross Examination of Iris Victoria Merin
by
Prosecutor Anthony Prestoza
Q: In the direct examination, you told
this
Honorable Court that you work as a food
toxicologist, how long have you been
practicing this profession?
A: 7 years.
Q: What is your specialization?
A: I specialize in chemical analysis of
food
composition and toxicity of food
contents.
Q: So, you have knowledge of different
kinds
of chemicals and food substances?
A: Yes.
Q: Are you familiar with rodenticide?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Is it poisonous?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Do you think it can kill a person?
A: Depending on the amount, Your
Honor.
Q: Do you use rodenticide?
A: Yes, we use them for killing house
rats.
Q: Do you have a rodenticide at home?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Do you recognize this box of rat
killer,
previously marked as Exhibit F?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Was this the package that contained
the
rat killer?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Were you the one who bought this?
A: No. It was Catherine who bought it
because she intends to clean the
apartment
and to eliminate the rats at home.
Q: Miss Witness, were you aware of the
provision in the lease contract which
said
that it is the responsibility of the lessor
to
conduct quarterly pest control
measures?
A: Yes, Your Honor. In fact, I was
surprised
why Catherine bought rodenticide, well
in
fact our lease agreement provides that
we
should report any complaints we have to
the
lessor.
Q: How long have you been staying with
the
complainant in the same apartment?
A: About 8 years now, Your Honor.
Q: Do you have any other companion in
the
apartment where you and Catherine
stay?
A: None
Q: Does this mean that either only you
or
Catherine prepares the food and drinks
that
may be found in the apartment.
A: Yes. Except those which are ready to
eat
or drink. And sometimes if a close
female
relative from the province decides to
stay for
a while in the city, we allow her to stay
in the
apartment.
Q: The night before Catherine was
poisoned,
were there any other person staying
with
you in the apartment?
A: None sir.
Q: So during that time, all the drinks and
food inside the apartment were either
prepared by you or Catherine?
A: Most probably, Your Honor.
Q: Are you aware of the findings of the
doctor who attended Catherine that she A: Yes, Your Honor.
was Q: How did you come to know him?
poisoned around 6 hours earlier before A: He is the head security officer of the
she company where I and Catherine work.
was brought to the Hospital? Q: Does he visit your apartment
A: Yes, Your Honor. regularly?
Q: Where were you during that time? A: Yes, I think so.
A: I was in the office. I have work. Q: Do you entertain him when he visits
Q: On the day of the incident, what time your
did place?
you wake up? A: Not at all. I usually give the couple
A: The usual. 5:30 AM. some
Q: Did you wake up earlier than privacy.
Catherine? Q: Did you like him?
A: Yes, Your Honor A: No, Your Honor.
Q: During that time, did you notice any Q: Did you nurture any affection towards
grapefruit juice in the ref? him?
A: Yes. We always have some stock of A: No, Your Honor.
juice. Q: Are you not jealous of your best
Q: You testified that you and the friend?
complainant A: No, Your Honor.
were childhood friends. Were you not Q: Did you not develop any ill feelings
concerned during the time that she towards your best friend when you
suffered learned
from depression? that she and Ritchie is getting married?
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: Objection, A: No, Your Honor. In fact, I’m happy for
Your the
Honor, counsel is speculating. both of them.
(Pag overruled, ANSWER: I was PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: No further
concerned questions, Your Honor.
about her, but knowing her, she would COURT: Re-direct?
not ATTY. TAPIRE: No, Your Honor.
tell me how she feels because she liked COURT: Miss Witness, You may step
keeping things to herself) down.
(Pag sustained, reform the question to: Formal Offer of Evidence of Defense
WHAT DID YOU DO TO HELP THE ATTY. OCAMPO: Your Honor, we are
COMPLAINANT DURING THE TIME now
SHE WAS resting the case for the defense.
SUFFERING FROM DEPRESSION? COURT: How do you intend to submit
Answer: I your
was always talking to her, asking her formal offer?
how ATTY. OCAMPO: We can now formally
she feels, if she was okay or not.) offer
Q: Miss Witness, do you know the our evidence Your Honor.
fiancée of COURT: Proceed.
the complainant? ATTY. OCAMPO:
Exhibit 1 is the Summary Discharge of the defense counsel and comments
Report to prove the complainant’s thereon by the public prosecutor, the
admission Court
for treatment at the Medical Center resolves to admit all the exhibits offered
Manila. by
Exhibit 2 is the Psychiatric the defense counsel specified in the
Assessment issued by Dr. Leira Taruc offer.
to COURT: Any rebuttal-evidence, Fiscal?
prove mental and emotional condition of PROSECUTOR SARSABA: No rebuttal
the evidence, Your Honor.
complainant at the time she was COURT: Considering that the public
admitted prosecutor will not present rebuttal
for psychiatric treatment. evidence, the court gives the parties 30
Exhibit 2-A is the signature by Dr. days
Leira Taruc as part of her testimony from today within which to file their
attesting respective memoranda. The case shall
to the fact that she was the psychiatrist be
of deemed submitted for decision after the
the complainant at Medical Center lapse of the said period, even without
Manila. the
Exhibit 3 consists of printed copies of said memorandum.
the electronic mails sent by the COURT: Order.
complainant
to witness Kate Nunez to prove the
mental
and emotional instability of the
complainant
and her suicidal tendencies.
Exhibit 3-A is the printed copy of the
electronic signature of the complainant
to
prove the authorship of the electronic
mails
sent by her.
COURT: Any comment, Prosecutor
Sarsaba?
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA:
As to Exhibit 1 and 1-A, we can admit its
existence and authenticity, Your Honor.
As to Exhibit 2 and 2-A, we can only
admit
the existence but not the authenticity
and
truthfulness Your Honor.
Court: Acting on the formal offer of
exhibits
 SCRIPT Catherine Jane Manarang.
Frustrated Murder COURT: Swear in the witness.
INTERPRETER: Do you swear to tell
People vs. Merin
the truth,
CHARACTERS:
all the truth and nothing but the truth in
Ayn Sarsaba – Prosecution Counsel
this
Anthony Prestoza – Prosecution
case?
Counsel
WITNESS: Yes, sir.
Katherine Jane Manarang –
COURT: Please state your name and
Complainant
other
Richard Alvin Nalupta – Boyfriend of the
personal circumstances.
Complainant (Prosecution Witness)
WITNESS: Catherine Jane Manarang,
Dr. Juan Paolo Gascon – Expert
28 years
Witness
of age, single, a Certified Public
Analita Ocampo – Defense Counsel
Accountant
Helen Paulette Tapire – Defense
of the Accounting Division of Nestle
Counsel
Philippines and a resident of Unit 143
Iris Victoria Merin - Accused
Astral
Leira Taruc – Expert Witness
Apartment Padre Faura St. Ermita,
Catherine Bool- Nunez – Officemate of
Manila.
Complainant (Defense Witness)
COURT: Your witness.
Joel Macalino
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: The
________________________________
witness is
________________________________
being presented to testify on the fact
________________________________
that
__
the accused bought the rat killer and
______________________________
that the
PROSECUTION
substance that poisoned her was from
Direct Examination of Catherine Jane
the
Manarang by Prosecutor Anthony
grapefruit juice which the accused
Prestoza
prepared.
COURT: Call the case.
May we proceed Your Honor?
INTERPRETER: For hearing, Criminal
COURT: Proceed.
Case No.
Q: Catherine Jane Manarang, will you
12345, People of the Philippines vs. Iris
please
Victoria Merin.
tell this Honorable Court where you
COURT: Appearances.
were on
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: For the
October 17, 2007 at around 8 o’clock in
government.
the
ATTY. TAPIRE: For the defense.
morning?
COURT: Ready?
A: I was in our apartment at Unit 143
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: Ready
Astral
Your Honor.
Apartment Padre Faura St. Ermita,
COURT: Call your witness to the
Manila.
witness stand.
Q: Who lives in that apartment?
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: May I call
on
A: I and my best friend, Iris Victoria previously marked as Exhibit A. Please
Merin. go
Q: Who was with you at that particular over this document and tell this
time Honorable
of the day? Court if this is the lease agreement you
A: I was alone because I did not report are
for referring to.
work to prepare for my engagement A: Yes, this document is the lease
party. agreement.
Q: How did you prepare for the party? Q: Whose signature is this above the
A: I decided to clean the house. printed
Q: And what particular areas of the name Catherine Jane Manarang which
house did is
you clean? appearing on page 2 of this contract of
A: I cleaned the living room and the CR lease?
first. A: My signature, sir.
Then I cleaned the dirty kitchen. Q: And this signature belongs to whom?
Because I (Prosecutor Prestoza pointing at the
remembered Iris said something like right
“Dumadami na yung mga rodents sa portion of the document)
dirty A: Our lessor, Mr. Rhandell Matuloy.
kitchen.” PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: Which for
Q: The last place you cleaned was the purposes
dirty of identification, Your Honor, I would like
kitchen? to
A: Yes, Your Honor. request the marking of the signature
Q: What did you do in order to solve the appearing above the printed name of
problem on the rats? Catherine Jane Manarang as Exhibit A-
A: I used a rat killer, Your Honor. 1.
Q: Who bought the rat killer? COURT: Mark it.
A: Iris bought it because she told me PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: And the
that she signature
noticed that there were rats in the place. appearing above the printed name of
Q: Have you actually seen any rats in Rhandell Matuloy as the lessor be
your marked as
place? Exhibit A-2.
A: No. Actually, it made me wonder... I COURT: Mark it.
just PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: We would
relied on the word of Iris. Besides, in our also like
lease agreement, there was a stipulation to request for the marking of stipulation
that no.8
it shall be the owner’s responsibility to in this lease agreement as Exhibit A-3.
conduct quarterly pest control COURT: Mark it.
measures. Q: Was there consistent compliance by
Q: I am showing to you this document the
owner?
A: Yes.
Q: What happened next?
A: After cleaning, I rested because I got
tired.
I remembered that before Iris left that
morning for work, she told me not to
forget
to drink the grapefruit juice she prepared
for
me.
Q: Where did you find the grapefruit
juice?
A: Inside the ref.
Q: If that pitcher containing the
grapefruit
juice will be shown to you, will you be
able to
recognize it? (lawyer takes the pitcher
showing it to the victim)
A: Yes, that’s the one.
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: For the
record, the
pitcher, previously marked as Exhibit B
was
recognized by the victim as the pitcher
containing the grapefruit juice prepared
by
the accused for the complainant.
Q: When did you drink the said
beverage?
A: Before I went to Starbucks.
Q: How many glasses were you able to
drink?
A: I drank about 2 glasses.
Q: Can you estimate the amount of juice
you
drank?
A: A glass would contain about 300-350
mL
of liquid. So, that would make about
600-700
mL.
Q: What else did you do on that day?
A: I went out to meet Iris for our usual
coffee
break in Starbucks at 3 o’clock in the
afternoon. We spent the whole
afternoon
together until we decided to go home for
the
party.
Q: Did you feel anything at that time?
ATTY. OCAMPO: Objection, Your
Honor!
Question is leading.
COURT: Sustained.
Q: What happened at Starbucks?
A: While we’re eating, I complained to
Iris
that my head was aching.
Q: Did your friend say anything?
A: She told me that I was just tired.
Q: What time did you leave Starbucks?
A: 5 o’clock.
Q: What time did you arrive in your
apartment?
A: We arrived at about 5:30 o’clock in
the
late afternoon. The dinner party was set
at 6
o’clock that evening.
Q: What happened later?
A: The guests arrived. We entertained
them.
Q: Was your fiancée with them?
A: Yes.
Q: What happened next?
A: I approached Iris and chatted with
her.
Q: What did you feel at that time?
A: My headache worsened. I began to
feel
nauseous and I vomited. I felt so weak
that I
lost my balance.
Q: Did anyone come to help?
A: Yes, Iris caught me before I hit the
floor.
Q: Did you notice anything else?
A: Before I totally lost consciousness, I
saw
that Iris was smiling while she held on to A: No, Your Honor.
me. Q: Miss Witness, did you know that a rat
Q: So, if the accused is inside this poison could also poison humans if
courtroom, accidentally swallowed?
would you be able to identify and point A: Yes, Your Honor.
to Q: So, even if you knew that, you still
her? did not
A: Yes, Sir. (Victim pointed to the use any protection for your hands?
accused.) A: Yes, because I planned to wash my
There. hands
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: That is all, after I cleaned the dirty kitchen.
Your Q: After cleaning the dirty kitchen?
Honor. A: Yes, Your Honor.
COURT: Cross? Q: Not right after you put the poison into
ATTY. OCAMPO: Yes, Your Honor. the
Cross Examination of Catherine Jane rice, as you have said earlier?
Manarang by Atty. Analita Ocampo A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Miss Witness, you testified that in the Q: You testified that you drank the
lease contract, the lessor had the grapefruit
responsibility to conduct pest control juice. What was the color of the juice?
measures. How often is this pest control A: Yellow.
conducted? Q: When you drank the juice, what was
A: Quarterly, Your Honor. its
Q: And during what months did the taste?
lessor A: It was sour, a bit bitter, Your Honor.
conduct these pest control measures? Q: Bitter?
A: February, May, August, and A: Yes, Your Honor.
November of Q: Hindi ka ba nagtaka at mapait yung
every year, Your Honor. juice
Q: Miss Witness, you testified that in na ininom mo?
cleaning PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: Objection:
the dirty kitchen, you used a rat poison Your
to kill Honor! My witness cannot understand
the rats there. Is that right? Filipino.
A: Yes. COURT: Let the question be translated
Q: How did you use the rat poison? for
A: I took the pack out of the box. Then I the witness.
put INTERPRETER: Did you not wonder
some into my hand. I put the rat poison why the
in juice was bitter?
some rice and then I put the rice on the A: No, Your Honor. The grapefruit juice
floor really
so that the rats could eat them. has a slight bitter taste, perhaps
Q: You did not use any gloves to protect because it
your was so sour.
hands or your skin?
Q: You testified that before the accused Q: So you cannot see clearly at the time
left you
the house, she told you not to forget to fell to the ground?
drink A: Yes, because I was so dizzy.
the juice. Has she done this even before Q: So you cannot possibly say that Iris
the was
incident happened? really smiling when she held you?
A: Yes, Your Honor. Both of us used to A: I’m not sure Your Honor.
do Q: Miss Witness, have you ever visited
that. We often leave food and drinks for a
each psychiatrist?
other. A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: So, when she told you not to forget to Q: When was this?
drink the juice, it was nothing new to A: Around August 2006, Your Honor.
you, Q: Why did you go to such psychiatrist?
because both of you had that habit. A: I needed treatment for my
A: Yes, Your Honor. depression,
Q: You testified that at 3 pm on October Your Honor.
17, Q: What was the cause of your
2007 you met with the accused at a depression?
coffee A: My parents died of a terrible accident,
shop. When you were with the accused, and
did I blamed myself for their death.
you notice anything different about her? Q: Who was the doctor who treated
A: Yes, Your Honor. you?
Q: What was that? A: Dr. Leira Taruc.
A: When I complained about my Q: Where is her clinic located?
headache, A: At the Medical Center Manila.
she just told me that I was just tired. Q: What did this Dr. Taruc do to treat
Q: Were you not really tired after you?
cleaning A: I went through psychological
the entire house? counseling
A: Yes, I was quite tired, Your Honor. sessions, Your Honor.
Q: You also said that at the party you Q: Were this counseling sessions
felt reduced
nauseous, and then you vomited and fell into writing?
to A: Yes, Your Honor.
the floor. Is that right? Q: Is this document the record of the
A: Yes, Your Honor. treatment you went through under Dr.
Q: When you were already at the floor, Taruc? (Atty. Ocampo showing the
were summary
you still conscious? discharge report to the complainant)
A: Yes, Your Honor. A: Yes, Your Honor
Q: Was your sight still clear? ATTY. OCAMPO: For the record, the
A: A bit blurry, Your Honor. complainant has identified Exhibit 1
which
was previously marked as Summary Services Division of Nestle Philippines
Discharge Report at the Medical Center and a
Manila. resident of 299 Aguado St. San Miguel
Q: Who prepared this medical report? Quiapo, Manila.
A: It was Dr. Taruc who prepared the COURT: Your witness.
report, PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: This
Your Honor. witness, Your
Q: Miss Witness, did anything happen Honor, Richard Nalupta is presented to
before testify on the fact that the accused
you visited your psychiatrist? secretly
A: I committed suicide. fell in love and could possibly be
Q: Did your psychiatrist prescribe any obsessed
medication? with him and may likewise began to hate
A: Yes, she gave me anti-depressant the
pills. complainant secretly. May we proceed,
Q: Are you still taking these Your
medications? Honor?
A: Not anymore, Your Honor. COURT: Proceed.
ATTY. OCAMPO: No further questions. Q: Do you know the complainant?
COURT: Re-direct? A: Yes.
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: No, Your Q: How are you related to her?
Honor. A: She is my fiancée.
We will call on our next witness. Q: Do you know the accused?
COURT: Miss Witness, You may step A: Yes.
down. Q: How is she related to the
Call your next witness. complainant?
Direct Examination of Richard Nalupta A: She is the childhood friend of the
by complainant; officemate; and they live in
Prosecutor Anthony Prestoza the
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: I’m calling same apartment.
on Mr. Q: Were you aware that the accused
Richard Alvin Nalupta. likes
INTERPRETER: Do you swear to tell you?
the truth, ATTY. OCAMPO: Objection, Your
all the truth and nothing but the truth in Honor.
this Counsel is speculating.
case? Q: Do you visit the complainant in their
WITNESS: Yes Sir. apartment?
COURT: Please state your name and A: Yes, Your Honor.
other Q: How often do you visit the
personal circumstances. complainant?
WITNESS: Ritchie Nalupta, 30 years of A: During weekdays, whenever I drop
age, her
single, head security officer of the after work, and during weekends.
Security Q: Whenever you visit the complainant
in
their apartment, are there any persons
around?
A: Yes, sometimes, Iris was there.
Q: When you visit the complainant
during
weekend, was the complainant always
there?
A: Not always, Your Honor.
Q: What do you mean when you said
that the
complainant was not always there?
A: She’s not there because she went
out.
Q: And whenever that happens, who do
you
find at their apartment?
A: Iris, Your Honor.
Q: Mr. Witness, what do you do
whenever
you visit the complainant at their
apartment
and she is not around?
A: I wait for her to come back, Your
Honor.
Q: Where or in what particular part of
the
apartment do you wait?
A: At the living room, Your Honor.
Q: And while waiting, what normally
transpires?
A: I watch the tv or listen to music.
Q: You said earlier that whenever the
complainant is not around during your
visit,
Iris was at the apartment, is that right?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: So there were times that only you
and the
accused were in the apartment, while
you
were waiting for the complainant?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: What transpires whenever you and
the
accused are alone in the apartment?
A: The accused flirts with me, Your
Honor.
Q: What do you mean when you said
she was
flirting with you?
A: She wears revealing clothes, she
says “I
love you” jokingly, mga ganun.
Q: Do you recall how many times these
have
happened?
A: Many times, Your Honor.
Q: What do you tell the accused every
time
she flirts with you?
A: I don’t mind her jokes.
Q: Does your fiancée know of these
instances?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Why?
A: Because I told her a few times about
it.
Q: What did your fiancée say?
A: She said: “Don’t mind her. She’s
crazy.”
Q: Mr. Witness, please examine this text
message, and tell the Court if you
recognize
it?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Why do you recognize it?
A: Because I received that text message
from the accused on August 15, 2007.
Q: This text message purports to have
been
sent by the person owning this mobile
number, 09173237890. Do you
recognize the
person who owned this number?
A: Yes, that is the mobile number of the
accused, Your Honor.
Q: How do you know?
A: Because the mobile number of the
accused is stored in my mobile phone,
Your
Honor.
Q: Will you please read aloud the Q: What did you do when you learned of
contents of the
this text message? incident?
A: “Richie, kung hindi ka magiging akin, A: I rushed to her. She was already lying
walang makikinabang sa’yo!” (“Richie, if on
I the ground.
won’t have you, no one else will!”) Q: What did you do afterwards?
Q: Mr. Witness, kindly read the next text A: I called for an ambulance. We rushed
message. her
A: “Akin ka lang, Richie. Mamamatay to the hospital.
ang Q: How long did you stay with her at the
kahit sinong aagaw sa’yo.” (You’re hospital?
mine, A: About four hours. I waited for the
Richie. Whoever tries to steal you from doctor to
me come out.
will die.”) Q: When the doctor came out, what did
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: Your he
Honor, for the tell you?
record, these text messages appearing A: The doctor said my fiancée was
on poisoned.
the screen of the mobile phone of Mr. PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: No further
Nalupta, previously marked as Exhibit C questions, Your Honor.
has COURT: Cross?
been identified by the witness. ATTY. OCAMPO: Yes, Your Honor
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: This Cross Examination of Richard Nalupta
document is by
the printed copy of the text messages Atty. Analita Ocampo
contained in the mobile phone of Mr. Q: Mr. Witness, you have testified that
Nalupta. We would like to request that it whenever you and Ms. Merin are alone
be in the
marked as Exhibit C-1. apartment, she tried to flirt with you. Is
COURT: Mark it. that
Q: How often does she send you this right?
kind of A: Yes, Your Honor.
text messages? Q: What made you say that?
A: Almost everyday, Your Honor. A: Well, I feel she made some
Q: What were you doing during the advances.
engagement party? ( extra sweetness )
A: I was entertaining our friends. Q: How long have you known Ms.
Q: Were you near the victim? Merin?
A: No. I was about 8 meters away from A: I have known her ever since I began
her. courting my fiancée since both of them
Q: Who was with the victim when the live
incident happened? in the same apartment. That’s about
A: She was with the accused. four
years ago.
Q: Would you consider Ms. Merin as ATTY. OCAMPO: No further questions,
your Your
friend? Honor.
A: Ummm.... Yes. COURT: Re-direct?
Q: Mr. Witness, is it possible that the PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: No, Your
reason Honor.
why Ms. Merin treats you well and with We will call on our last witness.
extra COURT: Call your witness.
sweetness is because she considers Direct Examination of Dr. Juan Paolo
you as a Gascon
close friend since you are the fiancée of by Prosecutor Ayn Sarsaba
her PROSECUTOR SARSABA: I’m calling
best friend? on Dr.
A: Yes... Juan Paolo Gascon.
Q: You also testified that Ms. Merin sent INTERPRETER: Do you swear to tell
you the truth,
threatening text messages. What is you all the truth and nothing but the truth in
proof that it was indeed my client who this
sent case?
you those messages? WITNESS: Yes.
A: I am sure Your Honor because I am PROSECUTOR SARSABA: No more
familiar with the way she constructs her questions,
messages. Your Honor.
Q: Mr. Witness, does the complainant COURT: Cross?
use ATTY. TAPIRE: Yes, Your Honor.
your mobile phone in sending text Cross Examination of Dr. Juan Paolo
messages Gascon
to her friends? by Atty. Paulette Tapire
A: Yes, sometimes... Q: Doctor, you have testified that you
Q: How about you? Are there times also
when you specialize in Toxicology specifically
borrow the complainant’s cellular Poisoning
phone? and Drug Overdose, hence, you are an
A: Yes, there are times I use her phone. expert in that field, am I right?
Q: So, is it possible that Ms. Merin’s A: Yes.
phone Q: Doctor, when does ingestion of the
has also been borrowed by someone cyanide poison cause the onset of
else symptoms
and it was not her who sent you those of cyanide poisoning?
text A: Patients who ingest potentially fatal
messages? amounts may not develop life-
A: Yes... it’s possible. But Your Honor threatening
I’m symptomatology for up to 1 to 2 hours
really sure she was the one who sent following exposure.
me Q: Symptoms such as?
those messages.
A: In patients who do not experience A: Yes. That is possible.
sudden Q: Are you sure?
collapse, the initial signs and symptoms A: I can say that it is possible that the
can patient’s condition was not due to
resemble those of anxiety or cyanide
hyperventilation syndrome. Early signs poisoning.
include headache. Late signs of Q: Doctor, about the source of the
poisoning poison,
are nausea, vomiting, loss of you only said possible sources, right?
consciousness, A: Yes.
and a variety of cardiac effects. Q: By possible, you mean...?
Q: The patient-complainant also testified A: Probable or potential source of the
that poison,
she drank two glasses of the alleged Ma’am.
source Q: That the grape fruit juice is just one
of the poison – the grape fruit juice – at possible source of the cyanide poison?
around 2:45 pm and the onset of the A: Yes.
symptoms of cyanide poisoning was Q: And that there are other possible
about sources
6:00 pm. Thus, 3 hours had lapsed from of the cyanide as well?
the A: Yes.
ingestion of the alleged source (grape Q: So, is it safe to conclude, Doctor, that
fruit the
juice) before the symptoms developed, cyanide poison may have come from
am I another
right? source considering that for that day, the
A: Yes. patient’s food intake comprised of
Q: But you also said that symptoms of different
cyanide poisoning are expected to food and beverages?
develop 1 A: Yes, that is possible.
to 2 hours following ingestion? Q: Are you aware of the history of said
A: Yes. patient, that she had at one time in the
Q: If that’s the case, don’t you think past,
there is attempted to end her life due to
an inconsistency of the duration of depression?
ingestion A: Yes.
and onset of symptoms between the Q: That she has a history of one
patient’s actual case and the previous
established suicidal attempt one year from the date
scientific findings of cyanide poisoning? of
With the incident?
this, does it not mean that the condition A: Yes.
of Q: In your opinion, is said fact relevant
the patient can not be attributed to to the
cyanide determination of the cause of the
poisoning but to some other cause? symptoms?
A: Yes. History of any previous suicidal
attempts, history of the patient’s mental
condition and history of business,
marital
and social failures are taken into
consideration in cases of poisoning.
Q: Is it safe to conclude then that it is
possible that the poisoning is
attributable to
suicide?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
ATTY. TAPIRE: No further questions,
Your
Honor.
COURT: Re-direct?
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: Yes, Your
Honor
Re-Direct Examination of Dr. Juan
Paolo
Gascon by Prosecutor Sarsaba
Q: Doctor, is it possible that the onset of
symptoms for cyanide poisoning varies
for
each person? Is it possible that said
symptoms may appear beyond the
normal 1-
2 hour duration?
A: That is possible.
Q: Will you explain to us how that is
possible?
A: Some persons possess different
levels of
sensitivity to certain substances. The
body
may acquire tolerance to some
substances.
Another would be: The body has a
natural
defense against cyanide exposure in the
form of an endogenous enzyme,
namely,
rhodanese. This enzyme catalyzes
cyanide
complexing with sulfur, forming the
much
less toxic ion thiocyanate. The
availability of
sulfur constitutes the rate limiting factor
in
natural cyanide detoxification. In the
absence of exogenous source of sulfur,
rhodanese activity is too slow to prevent
serious toxicity or death.
Q: Could you explain to the Court what
you
mean by that Doctor?
A: Even though the normal duration is 1
to 2
hours, there are some cases in which
the
signs and symptoms of cyanide
poisoning in
a patient may be delayed and appear
beyond the normal duration. In the case
of
the patient Miss Manarang, there was a
one-
hour delay of appearance of symptoms
because as confirmed in her lab tests,
her
body produces abnormal amounts of
sulfur
and as I’ve mentioned earlier, when
there is
more sulfur in the body, the cyanide
detoxification in the body is hastened,
thus,
the serious toxic effects of cyanide will
be
diminished. Lastly, the food intake of the
patient may possibly contribute to such
effect.
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: No further
questions, Your Honor.
COURT: Re-cross?
ATTY. TAPIRE: No re-cross, Your
Honor.
COURT: Mr. Witness, you may step
down.
Formal Offer of Evidence by the
Prosecution
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: Your
Honor, we are
now resting the case for the
prosecution.
COURT: How do you intend to submit
your
formal offer?
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: We can
now offer
our evidence, Your Honor.
COURT: Proceed
PROSECUTOR SARSABA:
Exhibit A is the Contract of Lease
being offered to prove that there is a
stipulation on the quarterly conduct of
pest
control measures by the lessor.
Exhibit A-1 and A-2 are the
signatures of Catherine Jane Manarang
as
lessee and Rhandell Matuloy as lessor
to
prove that these two persons were the
contracting parties to the lease
agreement.
Exhibit A-3 is the stipulation
regarding the pest control measures to
prove
that the lessor undertakes to conduct
the
quarterly pest control measures.
Exhibit B is the pitcher from which a
sample was taken and subjected to
chemical
analysis for the purpose of proving the
fact
that the source of poison was the
grapefruit
juice prepared by the accused contained
in
the pitcher.
Exhibit C consists of text messages to
prove that the accused nurtured feelings
for
the complainant’s boyfriend.
Exhibit C-1 consists of printed copies
of the text messages to corroborate to
the
fact that the accused had been sending
several text messages to the
complainant’s
boyfriend to manifest her obsession.
Exhibit D is the Medico Legal Report
issued by Dr. Juan Paolo Gascon to
prove the
following: (i) that the effective cause of
the
complainant’s condition is chemical
poisoning; (ii) that the dose taken by the
complainant is necessarily fatal; and (iii)
that
the possible source of cyanide poison is
the
grapefruit juice prepared by the
accused.
Exhibit D-1 is the signature of Dr.
Juan Paolo Gascon to be a part of his
testimony that he was the attending
physician of the complainant.
Exhibit E is the Toxicology Report of
the National Bureau of Investigation to
prove
the chemical analysis of the sample
taken
from the pitcher for qualitative and
quantitative determination of the poison.
Exhibit F is the Box of Rat Killer to
prove the source of the poison which
was
bought by the accused.
COURT: Any comment?
ATTY. OCAMPO:
As to Exhibits A, A-1, A-2 and A-3 we
admit
the existence and authenticity, Your
Honor.
As to Exhibit B, we admit its
existence but not its purpose.
As to Exhibits C and C-1, we can only
admit
as to the existence of the text messages
but
not its authenticity. presented to testify on the medical
As to Exhibit D and D-1, we admit the records
existence and authenticity, Your Honor. of the complainant who underwent
As to Exhibit E, we admit its authenticity several
and counseling sessions under her
genuineness. supervision
As to Exhibit F, we admit its existence and to prove the mental and emotional
but instability of the complainant. May we
not its purpose. proceed, Your Honor?
COURT: Acting on the formal offer of COURT: Proceed.
exhibits Q: When were you admitted to the
of the prosecutor and comments practice
thereon by of medicine?
the defense counsel, the Court resolves A: In 1995, Your Honor.
to Q: From what university or college did
admit all the exhibits offered by the you
defense graduate and when?
counsel specified in the offer. A: I graduated from the University of
DEFENSE Santo
Direct Examination of Dr.Leira Taruc by Tomas in the year 1994.
Atty. Q: Did you graduate with honors?
Helen Paulette Tapire A: Yes, Latin Honors Your Honor.
ATTY. TAPIRE: For the defense, we are Q: Do you have any post-graduate
ready degree?
to present our first witness, Your Honor. A: Yes, Your Honor. I finished my
COURT: Proceed. Master of
INTERPRETER: Do you swear to tell Psychiatry degree at the University of
the truth, Melbourne in 1998.
all the truth and nothing but the truth in Q: Since when have you been practicing
this as a
case? psychiatrist?
WITNESS: Yes Ma’am. A: For almost 10 years, Your Honor.
COURT: Please state your name and Q: What is the nature of your work as a
other psychiatrist?
personal circumstances. A: As a psychiatrist I deal with the
WITNESS: I am Dr. Leira Leonor Taruc, diagnosis,
35 treatment and prevention of mental and
years old, single, a licensed psychiatrist emotional illness and behavioral
at disorders of
the Psychiatry Department, Medical patients.
Center Q: How do you treat your patients?
Manila, and a resident of 123 Krusada A: I listen and talk to patients about their
St. mental, emotional or behavioral
Quaipo, Manila. problems
ATTY. TAPIRE: Your Honor, the witness and assess the status of these
is disorders. I
also prescribe medications, cognitive
therapy, behavioral therapy or
psychological
counseling depending on the patient’s
needs.
Q: Do you know the complainant in this
case?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Why do you know her?
A: She was my patient at the Psychiatry
Department of Medical Center Manila.
Q: When was this?
A: August 16, 2006.
Q: For what reason did she come to
your
clinic?
A: She consulted me about her
condition.
Q: Was the consultation out of her own
volition?
A: No. She was advised by her friend.
Q: Doctor, what procedures or tests did
you
conduct on the complainant during the
consultation?
A: I conducted physical examinations. I
asked her to tell something about her,
her
work, her family, and other personal
relationships. I just listened to whatever
she said. While she was talking, I
observed her
demeanor, the way she spoke, and her
gestures.
Q: What did you notice about the
complainant while she was talking to
you?
A: At first, the patient was apparently
normal. But when she began talking
about
her family, particularly her parents, she
began to sob, and then she cried. Her
hands
were trembling. She blamed herself for
the
death of her parents.
Q: What matters were revealed to you
by the
complainant in the course of the
consultation?
A: The physical examinations revealed
sleeping apnea, insomnia, hypertension,
and
migraines.
Q: As to her emotional condition?
A: The patient is suffering from major
depression, without psychotic features.
Q: Did you talk to anyone else regarding
the
patient’s emotional condition?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Who else did you talk to about her
emotional condition?
A: I spoke to her friend, the one who
advised
the patient to seek help. This was part of
the
analysis of the patient’s condition.
Q: Any other tests that you conducted
on the
patient?
A: No more, Your Honor.
Q: Doctor, from the examinations and
observations, what did you conclude
about
the complainant’s condition?
A: The patient from suffered from single
episode depression.
Q: Will you explain to this Court what
that
condition meant?
A: Single episode depression or SED is
a type
of major depression that occurs once,
as a
result of a single psychological trauma.
In
the case of the patient, based on our
conversations, the only traumatic event
which caused the depression was the
terrible
accident and death of her parents.
Q: What made you conclude that the
patient
was suffering from this condition?
A: The symptoms of SED, which include
insomnia, loss of appetite, which may,
or
may not lead to weight loss, mood
swings
and hypnotic spells, matched with the
results
of the patient’s physical examination.
Q: How did you treat the patient?
A: The patient was admitted to the
hospital
as inpatient.
Q: How long did she stay at the
hospital?
A: One month, Your Honor.
Q: And what methods or procedures did
you
use to treat the patient?
A: I conducted supportive counseling,
Your
Honor.
Q: Will you tell this Honorable Court
what
supportive counseling meant?
A: Supportive counseling helps ease the
pain
of depression and addresses the feeling
of
hopelessness that accompanies the
depression. In the case of the patient, I
talk
to her about what happened to her
during
the past week. If the patient mentioned
a appears a signature. Whose signature is
negative event, I ask her what she felt,
why
she felt that way and how she should
have
viewed the negative situation.
Q: And the counseling sessions were at
what
intervals?
A: Once a week, Your Honor.
Q: Did you prescribe any medication to
the
patient?
A: Yes, I prescribed anti-depressant
pills.
Q: When did you discharge the
complainant/
patient?
A: September 16, 2006, Your Honor.
Q: The medical findings that you had on
the
complainant, were these reduced into
writing?
A: Yes, Your Honor, I have made a
psychiatric
assessment on the medical findings.
Q: Did you personally prepare the said
writing?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Does this document have any
relation to
the report that you have prepared?
(Showing
the psychiatric assessment)
A: That is the report that I have
prepared,
Your Honor.
ATTY. TAPIRE: For the record, the
witness has
identified this document previously
marked
as Exhibit 2 as the psychiatric
assessment
record of Catherine Jane Manarang.
Q: In the last page of this document,
there
this,
Miss Witness?
A: That is my signature, Your Honor.
ATTY. TAPIRE: I respectfully request,
Your
Honor, that the signature appearing in
this
document be marked as Exhibit 2-A.
COURT: Mark it.
Q: Doctor, who ordered the discharge of
the
complainant?
A: I ordered the discharge, Your Honor,
upon
request of the complainant?
Q: Were there any conditions upon the
discharge of the complainant?
A: In my discharge summary, I stated
that
although the patient is being discharged,
she
is to continue treatment as an
outpatient.
Q: Did the patient comply with the
condition?
A: No, Your Honor. She did not return to
the
hospital after the discharge.
Q: Doctor, when the complainant was
discharged, what was her condition?
A: There was an improvement in her
condition in general, although she is not
completely stable yet.
Q: What do you mean she is not
completely
stable yet?
A: While she manifested improvement,
there
is a possibility of relapse.
Q: Do you mean to say, Doctor, that the
patient’s condition may recur?
A: If unguarded, Your Honor.
Q: Unguarded...?
A: If the patient does not follow the
treatment plan, the possibility of relapse
is
high.
Q: Do you mean to say, Doctor, that, in
the
case of the complainant, there is a
possibility
of a relapse, considering she did not
return
to you for further treatment?
A: Yes, Your Honr.
Q: And should there be a relapse, would
another suicide be also a possibility?
A: That is possible, Your Honor.
ATTY. TAPIRE: No further questions,
Your
Honor.
COURT: Cross?
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: Yes, Your
Honor.
Cross Examination of Dr. Leira Taruc by
Prosecutor Ayn Sarsaba
Q: Doctor, you testified that you treated
the
complainant for single episode
depression. Is
that true?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: When you discharged the
complainant,
what was her condition?
A: She was emotionally stable.
Q: What made you conclude that the
patient
was emotionally stable?
A: During our last counseling session,
there
were no longer signs of the SED. She
no
longer showed signs of mood swings.
She no
longer cried when I asked her about the
death of her parents. She said she
would not
blame herself anymore.
Q: You also testified that your
relationship
with the complainant lasted for one
month.
Will you tell this Honorable Court why it
lasted only for such period?
A: The patient responded well during
our
counseling sessions. The anti-
depressant
pills which I have prescribed also
worked
positively on her.
Q: The anti-depressant pills that you
prescribed; do they have any side
effects?
A: I asked the patient what she felt after
taking the medication. She said she felt
drowsy, which is a normal side effect of
anti-
depressants.
Q: Are there any other side effects?
A: Other anti-depressants make a
patient
restless and anxious. But the effects
really
vary from one person to another. In the
case
of the complainant, the only effect was
drowsiness.
Q: You testified that a relapse is
possible if
the patient does not continue treatment
after
discharge, is that true?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: How high are the chances of a
relapse?
A: It depends, Your Honor.
Q: Depends on what?
A: If the patient is under several
medications
and they are not followed, a relapse is
highly
possible. And if the patient does not
submit
to further counseling sessions when
required, a relapse is also possible.
Q: Was the complainant under
medication
when she was discharged?
A: Yes, but only for anti-depressant,
Your
Honor.
Q: So in your opinion, is the possibility
of a
relapse high or low?
A: I cannot tell, Your Honor.
Q: Would that also mean that, in the
case of
the complainant, such relapse may not
happen?
ATTY. TAPIRE: Objection, Your Honor,
the
question is leading.
COURT: Sustained.
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: No further
questions, Your Honor.
COURT: Re-direct?
ATTY. TAPIRE: No, Your Honor. We will
call on
our last witness.
COURT: Miss Witness, You may step
down.
Call your last witness.
Direct Examination of Kate Nunez by
Atty.
Analita Ocampo
ATTY. OCAMPO: May I call on our next
witness, Miss Kate Nunez.
INTERPRETER: Do you swear to tell
the truth,
all the truth and nothing but the truth in
this
case?
WITNESS: Yes Ma’am.
COURT: Please state your name and
other
personal circumstances.
WITNESS: I am Kate Nunez, 32 years
old,
married, an officemate of the
complainant
and a resident of 345, Paco, Manila.
ATTY. OCAMPO: The witness is being
presented to testify on the character and
suicidal tendencies of the complainant.
May
we proceed, Your Honor?
COURT: Proceed.
Q: Do you know the complainant?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Why do you know her?
A: I work with her at the accounting
department at Nestle Philippines.
Q: How long have you been
officemates?
A: About two years.
Q: How would you describe her as an
officemate?
A: She is a quiet person, a loner.
Q: In the two years that you’ve known
the
complainant, was there any untoward
incident which involved her?
A: None sir.
Q: Was there any time that you noticed
something different about the
complainant?
A: Yes.
Q: What was that?
A: I saw her one time at the comfort
room,
she was crying while staring at the
mirror.
Q: What did you do when you saw her
crying?
A: I asked her if something wrong
happened.
Q: What was her answer?
A: She said, “I wanna die!”
Q: What did you tell her after she said
those
words?
A: I asked her again what happened
Q: And what was her answer?
A: She did not say anything, she just
stared
at me.
Q: What was your reaction?
A: I said, “Come on, you can tell me
your
problems.”
Q: Did this kind of incident happen
again?
A: Yes. Two days after, the same
incident
happened in the comfort room.
Q: What did you do during that second
incident?
A: None. I did not ask her anymore
because I
know she wouldn’t tell me anyway.
Q: Do you remember what transpired
afterwards?
A: After about three days, I learned of
the
complainant’s attempt to commit
suicide.
Q: Miss Witness, on June 22, 2006, did
you
receive an e-mail from the complainant?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Who was the sender of that e-mail?
A: It was Catherine, Your Honor.
Q: How do you know?
A: Because she used her signature,
Your
Honor.
Q: Miss Witness, please examine this
writing,
and please tell the Court if you
recognized it?
A: That is the e-mail sent by the
complainant, Your Honor.
ATTY. OCAMPO: For the record, the
witness
has identified this document previously
marked as Exhibit A as the printed copy
of
the e-mail sent by the complainant.
Q: Can you tell the Court what the e-
mail
contained?
A: It says: “Dear Kate, my parents didn’t
deserve to die that way. I am so stupid, I
should have died with them. I wanna die
now!”
Q: How sure are you that this is the
same e-
mail which you received from the
complainant?
A: Because her signature appears at the
bottom of the e-mail, Your Honor.
Q: This signature appearing here, is this
the
signature of the complainant?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
ATTY. OCAMPO: Your Honor, it is
respectfully
requested that the signature appearing
in
this Exhibit 3 be marked as Exhibit 3-A.
ATTY. OCAMPO: No further questions.
COURT: Cross?
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: No cross-
examination for the witness, your honor.
Direct Examination of Iris Victoria Merin
by
Atty. Helen Paulette Tapire
ATTY. TAPIRE: For the defense, we are
ready
to present the accused, Your Honor.
COURT: Proceed.
INTERPRETER: Do you swear to tell
the truth,
all the truth and nothing but the truth in
this
case?
WITNESS: Yes Ma’am.
COURT: Please state your name and
other
personal circumstances.
WITNESS: Iris Victoria Uy Merin, 28
years of
age, single, food toxicologist at the
Research
and Development Division Nestle
Philippines,
and a resident of Unit 143 Astral
Apartment
Padre Faura St. Ermita, Manila.
COURT: Your witness.
ATTY. TAPIRE: Your Honor, the
testimony of
the witness is being offered to controvert
the
material allegations of the information
against Iris Victoria Merin and to testify
that
due to the complainant’s mental and
emotional state, her perspective of the
situation cannot be relied upon. May we
proceed, Your Honor?
COURT: Proceed.
Q: Miss Witness, are you the same Iris
Victoria Merin who is the accused in this
case?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Do you know the complainant?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Do you know her personally?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: How are you related to her?
A: She is a childhood friend. We work in
the
same company and we live in the same
apartment.
Q: Iris Merin, please tell this Honorable
Court,
where were you on October 17, 2007 at
around 6pm?
A: I was at the engagement party of
Catherine and Richard.
Q: Can you recall what happened during
that
engagement party?
A: I was chatting with Catherine while
having
a drink. We were in the kitchen then.
Afterwards, I saw her holding her
abdomen
and vomiting.
Q: What were you drinking that time?
A: I was drinking margarita, she was
drinking
Coke zero.
Q: Then what happened?
A: She dropped to the ground. She was
so
pale and sweaty. She lost her
consciousness.
Ritchie called for an ambulance and
then we
brought her to the nearby hospital.
Q: How long did you stay at the
hospital?
A: I stayed there overnight.
Q: Before the incident happened, where
were
you?
A: I was at the Starbucks with
Catherine.
Q: At around what time was that?
A: It was around 3pm. It was my coffee
break
then.
Q: Did Catherine go to work that day?
A: No, Your Honor.
Q: Would you know why?
A: She told me she would take a leave
because she needed to prepare for their
engagement party.
Q: Did you go to work that day?
A: Yes.
Q: What time did you leave the house?
A: I left the house 6:30 am.
Q: So could you positively say that you
had
no idea about what transpired on that
day,
October 17, 2007, before the incident at
the
engagement party happened?
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: Objection,
Your
Honor! The question is leading.
COURT: Sustained.
Q: When you left the house, what was
Catherine doing?
A: She was still sleeping, Your Honor.
Q: Miss Witness, were you aware that
the
complainant suffered from a major
depression?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Would you know the reason why she
suffered from that depression?
A: Because she couldn’t accept the
untimely
death of her parents. She blamed
herself for
their death.
Q: When did her parents die?
A: Around May of 2006.
Q: After the death of the complainant’s
parents, what happened to the
complainant?
A: She became insomniac. There were
nights
that she couldn’t sleep. She also drank
liquor
more often. She began to lose weight.
There
were also mood swings, particularly in
the
afternoon. There were times that she
would
just cry. Sometimes she just keeps quiet
and
not talk to me.
Q: Did the complainant remain that
way?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: For how long did she remain that
way?
A: I think around two months, before she
attempted to end her life.
Q: When did she attempt to commit
suicide?
A: Around July or August 2006, Your
Honor.
Q: After she committed suicide, what
happened?
A: She sought the help of a psychiatrist.
Q: Did you advise her to seek medical
help?
A: No, Your Honor, because I was afraid
she’d say I think she’s crazy.
Q: Did you do anything to help her?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: What did you do to help her in her
condition?
A: I was always talking to her, asking
her
how she feels, I kept telling her not to be
depressed anymore. I also told her to Q: Do you think it can kill a person?
stop A: Depending on the amount, Your
drinking. Honor.
Q: After she sought the help of a Q: Do you use rodenticide?
psychiatrist, A: Yes, we use them for killing house
what happened? rats.
A: Catherine recovered from the Q: Do you have a rodenticide at home?
depression. A: Yes, Your Honor.
She was sleeping well and was no Q: Do you recognize this box of rat
longer killer,
drinking often. previously marked as Exhibit F?
Q: No more signs of the depression A: Yes, Your Honor.
were Q: Was this the package that contained
present? the
A: Hmm, sometimes she suddenly kept rat killer?
quiet. A: Yes, Your Honor.
There were times I caught her crying Q: Were you the one who bought this?
silently. A: No. It was Catherine who bought it
ATTY. TAPIRE : No further questions, because she intends to clean the
Your apartment
Honor. and to eliminate the rats at home.
COURT: Cross? Q: Miss Witness, were you aware of the
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: Yes, Your provision in the lease contract which
Honor. said
Cross Examination of Iris Victoria Merin that it is the responsibility of the lessor
by to
Prosecutor Anthony Prestoza conduct quarterly pest control
Q: In the direct examination, you told measures?
this A: Yes, Your Honor. In fact, I was
Honorable Court that you work as a food surprised
toxicologist, how long have you been why Catherine bought rodenticide, well
practicing this profession? in
A: 7 years. fact our lease agreement provides that
Q: What is your specialization? we
A: I specialize in chemical analysis of should report any complaints we have to
food the
composition and toxicity of food lessor.
contents. Q: How long have you been staying with
Q: So, you have knowledge of different the
kinds complainant in the same apartment?
of chemicals and food substances? A: About 8 years now, Your Honor.
A: Yes. Q: Do you have any other companion in
Q: Are you familiar with rodenticide? the
A: Yes, Your Honor. apartment where you and Catherine
Q: Is it poisonous? stay?
A: Yes, Your Honor. A: None
Q: Does this mean that either only you
or
Catherine prepares the food and drinks
that
may be found in the apartment.
A: Yes. Except those which are ready to
eat
or drink. And sometimes if a close
female
relative from the province decides to
stay for
a while in the city, we allow her to stay
in the
apartment.
Q: The night before Catherine was
poisoned,
were there any other person staying
with
you in the apartment?
A: None sir.
Q: So during that time, all the drinks and
food inside the apartment were either
prepared by you or Catherine?
A: Most probably, Your Honor.
Q: Are you aware of the findings of the
doctor who attended Catherine that she
was
poisoned around 6 hours earlier before
she
was brought to the Hospital?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: Where were you during that time?
A: I was in the office. I have work.
Q: On the day of the incident, what time
did
you wake up?
A: The usual. 5:30 AM.
Q: Did you wake up earlier than
Catherine?
A: Yes, Your Honor
Q: During that time, did you notice any
grapefruit juice in the ref?
A: Yes. We always have some stock of
juice.
Q: You testified that you and the
complainant
were childhood friends. Were you not
concerned during the time that she
suffered
from depression?
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: Objection,
Your
Honor, counsel is speculating.
(Pag overruled, ANSWER: I was
concerned
about her, but knowing her, she would
not
tell me how she feels because she liked
keeping things to herself)
(Pag sustained, reform the question to:
WHAT DID YOU DO TO HELP THE
COMPLAINANT DURING THE TIME
SHE WAS
SUFFERING FROM DEPRESSION?
Answer: I
was always talking to her, asking her
how
she feels, if she was okay or not.)
Q: Miss Witness, do you know the
fiancée of
the complainant?
A: Yes, Your Honor.
Q: How did you come to know him?
A: He is the head security officer of the
company where I and Catherine work.
Q: Does he visit your apartment
regularly?
A: Yes, I think so.
Q: Do you entertain him when he visits
your
place?
A: Not at all. I usually give the couple
some
privacy.
Q: Did you like him?
A: No, Your Honor.
Q: Did you nurture any affection towards
him?
A: No, Your Honor.
Q: Are you not jealous of your best
friend?
A: No, Your Honor.
Q: Did you not develop any ill feelings
towards your best friend when you
learned
that she and Ritchie is getting married?
A: No, Your Honor. In fact, I’m happy for
the
both of them.
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA: No further
questions, Your Honor.
COURT: Re-direct?
ATTY. TAPIRE: No, Your Honor.
COURT: Miss Witness, You may step
down.
Formal Offer of Evidence of Defense
ATTY. OCAMPO: Your Honor, we are
now
resting the case for the defense.
COURT: How do you intend to submit
your
formal offer?
ATTY. OCAMPO: We can now formally
offer
our evidence Your Honor.
COURT: Proceed.
ATTY. OCAMPO:
Exhibit 1 is the Summary Discharge
Report to prove the complainant’s
admission
for treatment at the Medical Center
Manila.
Exhibit 2 is the Psychiatric
Assessment issued by Dr. Leira Taruc
to
prove mental and emotional condition of
the
complainant at the time she was
admitted
for psychiatric treatment.
Exhibit 2-A is the signature by Dr.
Leira Taruc as part of her testimony
attesting
to the fact that she was the psychiatrist
of
the complainant at Medical Center
Manila.
Exhibit 3 consists of printed copies of
the electronic mails sent by the
complainant
to witness Kate Nunez to prove the
mental
and emotional instability of the
complainant
and her suicidal tendencies.
Exhibit 3-A is the printed copy of the
electronic signature of the complainant
to
prove the authorship of the electronic
mails
sent by her.
COURT: Any comment, Prosecutor
Sarsaba?
PROSECUTOR PRESTOZA:
As to Exhibit 1 and 1-A, we can admit its
existence and authenticity, Your Honor.
As to Exhibit 2 and 2-A, we can only
admit
the existence but not the authenticity
and
truthfulness Your Honor.
Court: Acting on the formal offer of
exhibits
of the defense counsel and comments
thereon by the public prosecutor, the
Court
resolves to admit all the exhibits offered
by
the defense counsel specified in the
offer.
COURT: Any rebuttal-evidence, Fiscal?
PROSECUTOR SARSABA: No rebuttal
evidence, Your Honor.
COURT: Considering that the public
prosecutor will not present rebuttal
evidence, the court gives the parties 30
days
from today within which to file their
respective memoranda. The case shall
be
deemed submitted for decision after the
lapse of the said period, even without
the
said memorandum.
COURT: Order.