FOR:

FROM:
RE: The Liabilities of the PNP-CIDG Region 8 Raiding Team on the

Death of Mayor Rolando Espinosa Sr.

Date: January 5, 2016

FACTS

Who is Mayor Rolando Espinosa?

Rolando Espinosa Sr. is a Filipino politician who served as Mayor of Albuera,

Leyte entered politics when he ran for Mayor of Albuera, Leyte in the 2016
Philippine elections and his campaign focused on combating illegal drugs. Before
he started his political career, Espinosa already owned three houses and a hotel
in Albuera. The Philippine National Police alleges that his son Kerwin Espinosa is
involved in the illegal drug trade. [1]

Events that led to the death of Mayor Espinosa.

On August 1, 2016: Mayor Rolando Espinosa Sr. and his son, Kerwin were
asked by Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, who is conducting a nationwide
campaign against illegal drugs to surrender themselves within 24 hours "on the
grounds of drug-trafficking and coddling". Duterte said that the police will arrest
them and may shoot if they resisted arrest. [2]

The Espinosas were suspected to have links to retired police officials involved in
the drugs trade and Kerwin was also said to have ties with Jeffrey “Jaguar” Diaz,
the top drug personality killed in a police operation in June. [2]

On August 2, 2016: Espinosa went to Camp Crame and voluntarily surrendered

himself to Philippine National Police (PNP) Director General Ronald Dela Rosa
due to fear for his life. He admitted that his son was involved in the illegal drug
trade in Eastern Visayas and urged his son who had a standing arrest warrant to
surrender himself to the authorities. However he denied using money from illegal
drugs to finance his election campaign. Espinosa agreed to undergo drug testing
and was turned over to the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group. The
mayor did not have a standing arrest warrant at the time of his surrender.[2]

The mayor admits that his son was a top drug trafficker and that his son allegedly
received drug supply from Peter Co, who is detained at the New Bilibid Prison.
Espinosa Sr. says his son Kerwin, who was still being hunted down, had
undergone plastic surgery and looked different from the photo earlier shown to
the public. The PNP chief told Kerwin to surrender or die if he resists arrest. [2]
________________________________

[1] http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2016/11/08/witnesses-affidavits-albuera-leyte-mayor-rolando-espinosa-death.html
[2] TIMELINE From the arrest to the killing of Albuera Mayor Rolando Espinosa Published November 5, 2016 5:30pm

On August 3, 2016: At around 5:30 a.m (UTC +8) of this date, the police had a
shoot-out with twelve armed men with alleged links to Albuera, Leyte Mayor
Rolando Espinosa in Barangay Benolho of the mayor's town in August 2016. Six

1
of the men were killed and 237 grams (8.4 oz) shabu or methamphetamine worth
₱1.9 million along with some firearms were recovered. [3]

On August 4, 2016: the CIDG Region 8 and the Albuera Police Station filed
criminal charges against the Espinosas. [3]

On August 6, 2016: Rolando Espinosa, along with his daughter and common-
law wife left the PNP's residence and went back to Leyte. [3]

On August 7, 2016: Duterte announced a list of government officials, police

officers, and law practitioners who were allegedly involved in the illegal drug
trade in the country. Espinosa was included in Duterte's list. [3]

On August 10, 2015: A police buy-bust operaton in Mayor Espinosa's home

yielded 11 kg of shabu worth P88-million (US$ 1.8 million). The police also
discovered bomb-making components in the mayor's home. [3]

On August 10, 2016: With no formal charges against him, Mayor Espinosa has
gone back to work as Albuera mayor. He stayed at the town hall day and night
for about a week before he asked for police protection. [3]

On August 16. 2016: With no formal charges against him, Mayor Espinosa has
gone back to work as Albuera mayor. He stayed at the town hall day and night
for about a weekb before he asked for police protection. [5]

On August 24, 2016: Espinosa went again to the police to seek custody and
promised to reveal the powerful connections of his son. Three days later the
police took him into custody again due to threats to his life. [5]

On August 27, 2016: The PNP takes custody of Espinosa due to threats to his
life. This as the mayor submitted a sworn an affidavit naming other officials
allegedly involved in the illegal drug trade in Eastern Visayas. [5]

Mayor Espinosa executed this first affidavit, and named over 50 people – from
politicians to police to barangay leaders – with supposed links to illegal drugs.
These people either received “protection money” from Kerwin or had asked for a
favor at one point or another. [3]

On September 13, 2016: Albuera, Leyte Police head Chief Inspector Jovie
Espenido turns over to PNP Chief Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa documents detailing
the alleged transactions of Kerwin. [3]

On October 3, 2016: In a second affidavit, signed only on this date, Espinosa

went into the details of the cash or gifts the supposed names in the payroll
received. Majority of the cops on the list were posted in either Ormoc City or
Albuera. [3]

On October 5, 2016: Espinosa was arrested for alleged possession of illegal

drugs when the police found at least 11 kilograms (24 lb) of methamphetamine at
the Espinosa ancestral home in Albuerra. He was later brought to the Baybay

________________________________

[3] http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/587653/news/nation/from-the-arrest-to-the-killing-of-albuera-mayor-rolando-
espinosa#sthash.gKyLd1Ix.C9pYqowE.dpuf

City Regional Trial Court, which ordered him to be detained at the Baybay City
Provincial Jail. [3]

2
He was charged with illegal drug possession in October 2016 by the regional trial
court. He was also brought to the Western Leyte Provincial Hospital where he
underwent a medical examination. [3]

On October 6, 2016: Mayor Espinosa filed a Motion before Baybay, Leyte

Presiding Judge Carlos Arguelles, to be transferred to another detention facility.
[4]

On October 12, 2016: Espinosa pleads not guilty in the case concerning illegal
possession of firearms, ammunition and explosives. The firearms and
ammunition were recovered from his ancestral house in August, aside from the
more than P90 million pesos worth of shabu and bomb components. Espinosa’s
son Kerwin is also charged with the same offense. [3]

On October 17, 2016: Kerwin Espinosa is arrested in the United Arab Emirates
and was placed in the custody of Abu Dhabi police. [3]

On October 25, 2016: PNP Chief Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa says it will take 15
days to a month to bring Kerwin back to the Philippines from UAE. [3]

On October 26, 2016: Baybay, Leyte Presiding Judge Carlos Arguelles had
inspected the jail cell of Mayor Espinosa. [3]

On November 2, 2016: PNP Chief Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa says he wants
Kerwin to be detained at the PNP Custodial Center in Camp Crame, Quezon City
once he has been brought back into the country. [5]

On November 4, 2016: The search warrants which were applied by CIDG 8

provincial officer Leo Laraga were released by Judge Tarcelo Sabarre Jr. of the
Regional Trial Court branch 30 in Basey, Samar. , alleging that Espinosa had a .45
caliber pistol inside his cell at the Leyte Sub-Provincial Jail in Baybay City, while
inmate, Raul Yap, was involved in illegal drug transactions. [5]

The search warrants were secured based on the statement of witness and former
inmate Paul Olendan who allegedly entered the Baybay Leyte sub-provincial jail
on October 28, 2016 and saw and met Espinosa and Yap. [6]

On November 5, 2016: Espinosa and drug suspect Raul Yap are killed in a
shootout inside the Baybay City Provincial Jail. Operatives of the Criminal
Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) Region 8 are serving search warrants
on the two detainees for separate cases when Mayor Espinosa and fellow
detainee Yap, allegedly fired at the cops and a shootout ensued. [7]

________________________________

[3] http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/587653/news/nation/from-the-arrest-to-the-killing-of-albuera-mayor-rolando-
espinosa#sthash.gKyLd1Ix.C9pYqowE.dpuf
[4] 2 judges in hot water over Espinosa killing by: Gil C. Cabacungan - Reporter / @gcabacunganINQPhilippine Daily Inquirer /
01:23 AM November 13, 2016
[5] http://interaksyon.com/article/133992/nanlaban--albuera-mayor-espinosa-killed-in-leyte-jail-cell
[6] NBI: Espinosa killing a rubout /By Anjo Alimario, CNN Philippines / Updated 19:56 PM PHT Tue, December 6, 2016
[7] Rappler.com / Published 8:09 AM, November 05, 2016 / updated 11:35 AM, November 06, 2016

A firefight allegedly ensued between the arresting authorities and the two
inmates, which resulted in the detainees' deaths, according to the initial police
report. Crime scene investigators said they recovered one caliber Super .38 and
3
a magazine with live ammunition from Espinosa's cell, and one caliber .45 and a
magazine with live ammunition from Yap's cell. They also found one sachet of
suspected shabu and drug paraphernalia in Espinosa's cell. In Yap's cell,
meanwhile, police found 10 big sachets of shabu; 5 medium sachets of shabu;
27 packs of suspected dried marijuana leaves; and drug paraphernaila. [7]

In interviews with media, Police Regional Office (PRO) 8 director Chief

Superintendent Elmer Beltejar said neither the regional office nor the city police
were informed about the warrants. The CIDG team supposedly left only a
document with a Baybay City station desk officer. Neither was the CIDG
headquarters in Camp Crame well informed about the operation. The CIDG
director, Chief Superintendent Roel Obusan, was told only through a text
message, according to a high-ranking police source. [8]

Autopsy Result

Rolando Espinosa Sr., the mayor of Albuera, Leyte, was shot at least four times,
with one bullet piercing through his body, autopsy results revealed Sunday. The
autopsy also revealed the mayor could have been lying down when he was shot.
Lailano Villarino, lawyer of the Espinosa family, said the mayor sustained four
gunshot wounds according to the autopsy conducted by Police Chief Inspector
Benjamin Lara, medico legal of SOCO Region 7.

Three deformed bullets were recovered from the mayor's body. The fourth bullet,
however, went through his corpse. The autopsy showed Espinosa sustained a
head wound. The results said there is a possibility that the mayor was lying
down when he was shot, Villarino said.

Two of the mayor's pricey rings were also reported missing. The fired bullets are
set to be brought to the regional crime laboratory for further study. [9]

The closed circuit television footage of the encounter, however, is missing. CIDG
officials supposedly took it themselves.

CIDG 8 operatives involved in the killing of Mayor Espinosa are the

following:

1. Superintendent Marvin Marcos

2. Superintendent Santi Noel Matira
3. Chief Inspector Leo Laraga
4. Senior Inspector Deogracias Diaz III
5. Senior Inspector Fritz Blanco
6. Senior Police Officer 4 Juanito Duarte
7. Senior Police Officer 4 Melvin Cayobit
8. Senior Police Officer 4 Eric Constantito
9. Senior Police Officer 2 Benjamin Dacallos [10]
________________________________

[7] Rappler.com / Published 8:09 AM, November 05, 2016 / updated 11:35 AM, November 06, 2016
[8] Rappler / Bea Cupin@beacupin / Published 8:00 AM, / November 10, 2016 / Updated 12:05 PM, November 10, 2016
[9] http://news.abs-cbn.com/news/11/06/16/slain-mayor-espinosa-shot-4-times-autopsy-results-show
[10] http://www.rappler.com/nation/154717-nbi-mayor-espinosa-death-rubout /Rappler.com /Published 5:09 PM, December 06,
2016 /Updated 12:24 PM, December 07, 2016

10. Senior Police Officer 2 Alphinor Serrano Jr

11. Police Officer 3 Johnny Ibanez
12. Police Officer 3 Norman Abellanosa
4
13. Police Officer 2 Niel Centino
14. Police Officer 1 Bernard Orpilla
15. Police Officer 1 Lloyd Ortiguesa
16. Police Officer 1 Jerlan Cabiyaan
17. Cristal Jane Gisma
18. Divine Grace Songalia

The Regional Maritime Unit members involved in the killing of Mayor

Espinosa are the following:

1. Chief Inspector Calixto Canillas

2. Inspector Lucrecito Candilosas
3. Senior Police Officer 2 Antonio Docil
4. Senior Police Officer 1 Mark Christian Cadilo
5. Police Officer 2 John Ruel Doculan
6. Police Officer 2 Jaime Bacsal [10]

Different Versions and Testimonies on the death of Mayor Espinosa.

1. CIDG Region 8 Versions and Testimonies

a. The CIDG said they were in the Baybay City provincial jail to serve a
search warrant on Espinosa and another inmate, Raul Yap, at 4:10 a.m.,
but the two prisoners opened fire on them, causing them to return fire.
Both Espinosa and Yap were killed in the shootout, and pistols and some
sachets of “shabu” and marijuana were found in their cells, the police said.

b. The CIDG said the search warrants were issued by Judge Tarcelo A.
Sabarre Jr., presiding judge of Regional Trial Court branch 30 in Basey,
Samar, because they believed the two detainees kept firearms and illegal
drugs in their cells. [11]

c. Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) 8 Regional Chief

Marvin Marcos told CNN Philippines that an informant told Leyte CIDG 8
provincial officer Leo Laraga that Espinosa had a .45 caliber pistol inside
his cell at the Leyte Sub-Provincial Jail in Baybay City, while inmate, Raul
Yap, was involved in illegal drug transactions.

d. Laraga then went to a judge to apply for the search warrants, which were
released Friday afternoon and were carried out at around 4 a.m. Saturday.

e. Marcos said jail guards resisted and blocked the 15 CIDG operatives from
carrying out the search warrants. It took them 15 minutes to enter the jail
cells, which he said gave Espinosa and Yap time to prepare for the
search.

________________________________

[10] http://www.rappler.com/nation/154717-nbi-mayor-espinosa-death-rubout /Rappler.com /Published 5:09 PM, December 06,

2016 /Updated 12:24 PM, December 07, 2016
[11] http://thestandard.com.ph/news/headlines/220779/-espinosa-case-overkill-.html..

f. The officer said a shootout ensued during the operation. "Pagpasok pa

lang ng operatiba natin, pinaputukan na po sila. Dun po nagkaron po ng
desisyon yung mga kapulisan natin na gumanti ng putok. Na resulta po ng
5
 ikinamatay ni Mayor Espinosa at Raul Yap," Marcos said. [Translation:
When our operatives entered, they were fired at. That was when our
police decided to retaliate. This led to the deaths of Espinosa and Raul
Yap.]

g. CIDG 8 Regional Chief Marvin Marcos: Mayor Espinosa, inmate shot at

police, so the CIDG operatives fired back. This caused their deaths [12]
pic.twitter.com/ZHrKGHM93I — CNN Philippines (@cnnphilippines)
November 5, 2016

h. Marcos also explained the need to serve a search warrant for Espinosa
and Yap despite being detained in prison.

i. "Nagkakaroon ng pagkakataon na nagbibigay ng search warrant based sa

credible deponent kapag mayroong krimen na nangyayari sa loob ng
isang facility, gaya ng isang jail, tulad ng pagpapasok ng droga,
pagpapasok ng baril. Dapat kasama po ito sa iniimbestigahan kasi minsan
ito ay tino-tolerate ng mga miyembro ng jail facilities," he said.
[Translation: There are cases a search warrant is given if a credible
source says a crime is happening inside a facility, such as jails, like when
illegal drugs or firearms are brought in. It is included in what should be
investigated because sometimes members of jail facilities tolerate it.]

j. The Scene Of The Crime Operatives (SOCO) has so far recovered two
firearms from the scene of the incident. He said Espinosa used a .38
Super gun.

k. The CIDG said the SOCO was able to recover several sachets containing
suspected shabu, suspected dried marijuana leaves, and assorted drug
paraphernalia.

l. Chief Inspector Leo Laraga of CIDG Region 8 says SOCO now securing
jail cell of Albuera Mayor Espinosa, where the alleged shootout happened

2. Senate Hearing Investigation Testimonies

a. In a sequence of events presented by Supt. Marvin Marcos, the CIDG

regional director, Lacson noted the 19-man raiding team was able to enter
the provincial jail at around 4:30 a.m. on Nov. 5, forcing their way through
the gates with a bolt cutter. CIDG acting director Chief Supt. Roel
Obusan, citing his initial findings on the incident, said the raiding team had
to use force because the jail guards broke the key and left a portion of it
inside the lock. On the side of the jail guards, they claimed the person
opening the gate accidentally broke the key when he was fumbling to
unlock the gate.

1) Marcos’ report jumped from 4:30 a.m. to 5:58 a.m. when the police
Scene of the Crime Operatives (SOCO) arrived to investigate the crime
scene. What caught the attention of the senators was when Eastern
Visayas police director Chief Supt. Elmer Beltejar revealed there was

_______________________________

[12] pic.twitter.com/ZHrKGHM93I — CNN Philippines (@cnnphilippines) November 5, 2016

an earlier call made by Supt. Santi Noel Matira to the Regional Tactical
Operation Center (RTOC) at around 3:49 a.m. requesting for the
SOCO to proceed to the provincial jail.
6
 2) Since Marcos claimed the raiding team, which he was part of, was able
to go in the jail only at 4:30 a.m., Lacson said it was highly unusual for
Matira to call for the SOCO team even before Espinosa and another
inmate, Raul Yap, were killed. “You haven’t even entered and you
requested for SOCO already. It was as if you called for a funeral even
before the encounter,” Lacson remarked.

3) Laraga claimed Espinosa was not the main target of the operation of
his team but Yap who, according to an informant, was trying to sell
drugs from his jail cell. The informant was allegedly told to go to
Espinosa, when he saw the mayor with a .45 caliber pistol. After being
so apprised, Laraga said he relayed this information to Marcos, who
approved the operation against Espinosa and Yap. Laraga admitted
he was the one who shot Espinosa.

b. Upon the prodding of Senate Minority Leader Ralph Recto, Laraga

admitted he did not coordinate the operation with the warden of the
Baybay jail before entering the premises even though this was a
requirement in the warrant. Marcos also admitted he did not coordinate
with his superiors, particularly with Eastern Visayas police director Chief
Supt. Elmer Beltejar and Obusan.

1) Philippine National Police (PNP) Deputy Chief of Operations Benjamin

Magalong said the operations involving high profile targets should be relayed
to all commanders. “Both personalities should have been informed
beforehand, even days before when they were planning their operation,”
Magalong said. “They should have coordinated with and informed his
commanders. They should have specified their roles, mission and objective.
Everything should be very clear, especially the instructions laid out in the
search warrant,” he added. PHILSTAR/ Senators see premeditation, ‘bad
script’ in Espinosa death By Marvin Sy. [13]

c. According to operatives of the CIDG who killed Espinosa inside his jail
cell, the mayor fired at them first. The CIDG claims the shootout
happened when it tried to serve a search warrant on the mayor for
possession of drugs and a firearm inside the jail. — RSJ, GMA News
https://youtu.be/gvuLno9Eh7g?t=80 WATCH PACQUIAO LECTURING
CIDG AT SENATE PROBE

d. According to the CIDG presentation, the raiding team called in Scene of

the Crime Operatives (SOCO) to inspect the crime scene at 3:49 a.m.
The SOCO is the police forensics unit under the PNP Crime Laboratory.
Usually, the SOCO is called in after a crime or a shooting incident has
happened, so that its operatives can secure the incident site and gather
evidence.

1) However, in the case of Espinosa's killing at the Baybay City Provincial

Jail in Leyte, where he was under police custody, the SOCO was called
in even before the CIDG team could enter the jail premises. The

_______________________________

[13] The Philippine Star | Updated November 11, 2016 - 12:00am 0 78 googleplus0 0

SOCO was called in at 3:49 a.m. but the CIDG operatives only entered
the jail at 4:30 a.m. The shootout supposedly happened after that.

7
 2) For Senator Panfilo Lacson, who is a former PNP chief, the police has
a lot of explaining to do on this matter. "Bakit nagre-request na kayo
ng SOCO kahit hindi pa kayo nakakapasok," Lacson asked the CIDG
personnel present in the inquiry.[Why were you requesting for SOCO
while you're not yet inside?] "Ina-anticipate ninyo ba na may papatayin
kayo?" [Are you anticipating you will kill someone?]," Lacson further
asked. "Para kayong tumatawag ng punerarya, wala pang
engkwentro," he added. [It's like calling for a hearse, even if there's no
encounter yet.]

3) Superintendent Santi Noel Matira, who oversaw the operation, said he

made the call. But he pointed out he wasn't aware of the time, and
emphasized that he only called SOCO after the firefight that killed
Espinosa.

e. The medico-legal officer of the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group

(CIDG) said Albuera Mayor Rolando Espinosa was shot four times —
twice in the chest and twice in the abdominal region.

1) Police chief inspector Benjamin Lara noted, three of the wounds had
an upward bullet trajectory — this means Espinosa was either standing
up or lying down when he was shot dead.

2) During the Senate investigation on Espinosa's killing on Thursday, Lara

said in his testimony: "In this case your honor, there are two possible
positions for the victim and the assailant. One the victim could be in a
vertical position, if he was standing and the assailant or the tip of the
barrel of the gun was at a point lower than the point of entry of the
body of the victim, this would mean that the victim was on an elevated
position relative to the assailant. Or it could also be that the assailant
was standing and the victim was laying down."

f. In the same report the CIDG submitted to the Senate body, the police said
the CCTV was not working at the time Espinosa got killed. Senator Grace
Poe wanted further explanation on this.

1) "Gusto ko lang malaman, bakit yung report nakalagay, November

5 yung report na yung CCTV hindi gumagana. Tama ba yung
pagkakaintindi ko? November 5 din yung repair, Nov. 5 din
nangyari? Ganun ba yung report ninyo, ganun ba yung sinasabi ninyo,"
Sen. Grace Poe asked. [Translation: I'd like to know, it is indicated in
the report that in November 5, the CCTV was not working. Did I
understand it correctly? It was scheduled for repair on November 5,
and the encounter also happened November 5? Was that your report,
is that what you're saying?]

2) But Leyte Provincial Jail Warden Homobono Bardillon said the CCTV
was working at that time, and the CCTV was repaired and was turned
over on October 27. Bardillon added, they can prove that the CCTV
was working at the time-if only the hard drive was not missing.
"Merong hard drive, pero after ng raid nila, wala na doon," Bardillon
said. [There was a hard drive. But after their raid, it was already
missing.] Bardillon added, from 3:00 a.m. until 11:00 a.m. of
November 5, it was CIDG controlling the provincial jail.

3) CIDG Chief Inspector Leo Laraga, however, said they don't even know
where the CCTV hard drive is placed. Laraga added, they did not
even look for it because it was not the subject of their search.
8
3. Scene of the Crime Operatives (SOCO)

a. The CIDG was trying to serve a search warrant for Espinosa in connection
with illegal possession of firearms inside his cell at the Leyte Sub-
Provincial Jail in Baybay City.

b. Espinosa and another detainee named Raul Yap, who was also being
served a warrant for violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act
of 2002, reportedly resisted arrest during the operation, which occurred at
around 4 am.

c. A firefight ensued between the arresting authorities and the two inmates,
which resulted in the detainees' deaths, according to the initial police
report.

d. Crime scene investigators said they recovered one caliber Super .38 and
a magazine with live ammunition from Espinosa's cell, and one caliber .45
and a magazine with live ammunition from Yap's cell.

1) They also found one sachet of suspected shabu and drug

paraphernalia in Espinosa's cell.

2) In Yap's cell, meanwhile, police found 10 big sachets of shabu; 5

medium sachets of shabu; 27 packs of suspected dried marijuana
leaves; and drug paraphernaila. [14]

4. Philippine National Police-Internal Affairs Service (PNP-IAS) Report

a. Deputy Inspector General Chief Supt. Leo Angelo Leuterio of PNP-IAS

said that they are now in possession of the signed and subscribed
affidavits of the probable witnesses to what happened during the service
of warrant by the CIDG-8 on Mayor Espinosa and Raul Yap (another
inmate. (TRIBUNE Duterte not puzzled by Espinosa’s death Written by
Tribune Wires Thursday, 10 November 2016 00:00)

5. National Bureau of Investigation Report

a. The National Bureau Investigation (NBI) on Tuesday announced the

results of its probe into the killing of Albuera, Leyte Mayor Ronaldo
Espinosa inside the provincial jail.

1) According to the NBI, it was a rubout — not a shootout. This runs

opposite to the claims of the police raiding team — and the NBI is
standing by its findings.

_______________________________

[14] http://www.rappler.com/nation/151353-albuera-mayor-rolando-espinosa-killed-jail / Rappler.com / Published 8:09 AM,

November 05, 2016 / Updated 11:35 AM, November 06, 2016

2) "We mantain it was a rubout. There was a criminal intent. Pumunta

talaga doon para patayin si Espinosa [They really went there to kill
Espinosa]," NBI spokesperson Ferdinand Lavin said.

9
 b. Investigators said several witnesses disputed the claim of a shootout
between Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) Eastern
Visayas members and inmates Espinosa and Raul Yap.

1) Inmate Donald Palermo said he saw a policeman wearing sanitary

gloves and holding a short firearm entering Espinosa's cell. He was no
longer holding the gun when he left the premises.

2) While the policeman has yet to be identified, Lavin said their forensics
team also ruled out the shootout angle. "There are strong indications
na walang putok papunta towards the direction of the door. If there was
a shootout dapat ang putok ni Mayor Espinosa kung pumutok siya
towards the direction of the door," Lavin said. [Translation: There are
strong indications that there was no obstruction going towards the
direction of the door. If there was a shootout, the shot from Mayor
Espinosa should have been towards the direction of the door.]

c. The NBI also noted, the shakedown or Oplan Galugad at the Leyte sub-
provincial jail in Baybay town on October 30 to search for supposed
firearms and drugs, only yielded a few items like mobile phones.

1) The NBI pointed out that it's impossible for Espinosa and Yap to sneak
in firearms and drugs on the eve of serving the search warrants.

2) On the powder nitrates found on Espinosa, Lavin said a gun could

have been placed in the victim's hand and fired to make it appear that
he fought back. "Theoretically pwedeng lagyan or pwedeng ipaputok
then it would have powder nitrates on the firing or 'yung ginamit na...
kamay na ginamit," Lavin said. [Theoretically, a shot could have been
fired so it would have powder nitrates on the hand used.]

d. CIDG officials to face multiple murder raps. The NBI says the application
for a search warrant was based on the false statement of witness and
former inmate Paul Olendan. According to probers, Olendan's supposed
testimony that he entered the facility never really happened.

1) "We were able to establish that indeed, and in fact, Olendan did not go
inside the, or anywhere near the sub-provincial jail on October 28. He
was in Tacloban City around 130 kilometers from Baybay," Lavin told
the media.

2) NBI explained Olendan reported to the school where he worked the

day he allegedly saw and met Espinosa and Yap. His daily time record
and biometrics data showed his attendance at work.

e. Kerwin Espinosa, alleged Eastern Visayas drug lord, had claimed at the
Senate inquiry that Marcos solicited P3 million from him to fund the
mayoral bid of the police officer's wife in May 2016.

_______________________________

[15] http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2016/12/06/nbi-albuera-mayor-espinosa-killing-rubout.html / NBI: Espinosa killing a

rubout By Anjo Alimario, CNN Philippines / Updated 19:56 PM PHT Tue, December 6, 2016.

6. Baybay Leyte’s Jail Warden, Jail Guards and Inmates’ Testimonies

a. Speaking to the Philippine Star, jail warden Homobono Bardillon said jail
guards stopped the police from entering the compound because they
10
 could not produce a search warrant. Citing information from guards on
duty, Bardillon said Espinosa was heard “begging for his life.”

b. Investigators, however, cannot discount the possibility of distrust between

police and jail guards. Given the Espinosas’ supposed wide web of
contacts and payola benefactors, police have claimed that some jail
officials were coddling the Albuera mayor – a possibility Bardillon denied.

c. An inmate who witnessed the supposed police operation claimed CIDG

personnel cut off the CCTV just before they entered. Espinosa supposedly
pleaded with the police for them not to plant evidence, said the inmate. He
denied that Espinosa or Yap “fought back,” as the police claimed.

d. “They say Espinosa had a gun with him but he didn’t. We know that before
the searching here is strict,” said the inmate in an interview with media on
Monday, November 7.

e. The jail inmate said they were told by the police to stop and drop – and
warned that they would come back to kill them if they squealed. [(Photos tell 2
stories on Espinosa death: Shootout or rubout? By Nancy C. Carvajal and
Davinci Maru [16]

7. Philippine National Police Regional Internal Service in Eastern Visayas

a. The Philippine National Police Regional Internal Service in Eastern

Visayas are collecting sworn statements from the witnesses who claim to
have seen the incident. According to Victor Ongkiko, the Regional Internal
Service officer-in-charge, the witnesses said they are willing to execute
their affidavits.

b. Early Saturday, the Eastern Visayas' police Crime Investigation and

Detection Group (CIDG) went to the Baybay City Provincial Jail, where
Espinosa was being held, to serve search warrants for him. However, as
the two policemen serving the warrants entered Espinosa's cell, he and a
fellow inmate Raul Yap, were killed in what the CIDG called a "shootout."

c. The jail guards on duty that early Saturday said CIDG officials disarmed
them and four members of the Leyte Provincial Public Safety Company
who were assigned to the jail and its premises. They said the CIDG
personnel asked them to kneel and face the wall outside the jail's main
building.

d. Ongkiko said he asked the CIDG why they disarmed the guards. The
CIDG told him the guards were disarmed because they were "hostile."
According to the CIDG's account of the incident, the jail guards resisted
and blocked the operatives who were there to serve search warrants.

e. The CIDG's version of events does not align with eyewitness testimony:
An inmate said that there was no shootout when Espinosa and Yap were
killed.
_______________________________

[16] philstar.com | Updated November 10, 2016 - 10:07am 11 3077 googleplus0

f. The inmate claimed that the CIDG officials almost simultaneously fired at
Espinosa and Yap in their cells. Espinosa begged the officials not to plant
evidence in his cell, according to the inmate.

11
 g. CCTV footage of the incident remains missing.

h. During the PNP Internal Affairs Service's preliminary interviews, CIDG

operatives
denied their failure to coordinate with the regional police headquarters.
The CIDG said they sent a text message to the regional headquarters to
inform them
about the operation. But PNP Eastern Visayas director Chief
Superintendent Elmer Beltejar said they received the text at 4:26 a.m.,
when the CIDG operation was already over.

i. Beltejar said the standard procedure is for police operations to be

coordinated personally with his office. [17]

8. Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism Gathered Testimonies

a. An internal investigation conducted by CIDG in Camp Crame has revealed

that Espinosa was alone in his cell apparently sleeping when the team of
CIDG operatives arrived before dawn to serve a search warrant issued by
Judge Tarcelo Sabarre of the Bassey Samar Regional Trial Court Branch
30. [18]

b. Sabarre’s order covered cell number one occupied by Espinosa, and cell
number two supposedly occupied by Raul Yap. “However, the operatives
also searched other cells where Yap was supposedly hiding when they
failed to locate him in cell number two,” the police insider told PCIJ, adding
it could be a violation in the rules of implementation of the court order.
The police source says Yap apparently moved to another cell during the
standoff. Investigation also showed Yap fired at the operatives after a shot
rang out in Espinosa’s cell. [19]

c. “Nauna ‘yung putukan kay Espinosa bago ‘yung kay Yap (The shooting at
Espinosa’s cell came first before that in Yap’s),” the insider says. Paraffin
tests were conducted on Espinosa and Yap and both were supposedly
found positive of powder gun residue, the police insider also says. [19]

d. In the interview with PCIJ, the police insider also said that the light inside
Espinosa’s cell was off when the CIDG 8 team arrived and the operatives
had to use flashlight from their mobile phones to illuminate the area.

e. The insider also said that based on the jail guards’ deployment blue book
records, the closed-circuit television (CCTV) camera, which was expected
to give authorities a clear picture, was not taken by the CIDG operatives.
“When we checked the records, one of the entries stated that the CCTV
camera was broken and taken out of the facility for repair even before the
shooting incident took place,” the source said.
_______________________________

17] By CNN Philippines Staff Updated 22:42 PM PHT Tue, November 8, 2016 Metro Manila (CNN Philippines)
http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2016/11/08/witnesses-affidavits-albuera-leyte-mayor-rolando-espinosa-death.html
[18] Photos tell 2 stories on Espinosa death: Shootout or rubout? By Nancy C. Carvajal and Davinci Maru (philstar.com) | Updated
November 10, 2016 - 10:07am 11 3077 googleplus0
[19] Photos tell 2 stories on Espinosa death: Shootout or rubout? By Nancy C. Carvajal and Davinci Maru (philstar.com) | Updated
November 10, 2016 - 10:07am 11 3077 googleplus0

f. The police source, however, confirmed statements of witnesses that

before gunshots were heard emanating from his cell Espinosa had
shouted, “’Wag ninyo akong taniman! Wala akong baril! Wala akong
kutsilyo! (Don’t you plant anything on me! I have no gun! I have no
12
 knife!)” “The jail guards said the slain inmates had no gun,” said the
insider, “but the CIDG operatives maintained the inmates have guns and
fired at them first.’’

9. The Supreme Court Recommendation

a. Will investigate two Eastern Visayas judges for the killing of Albuera, Leyte
Mayor Rolando Espinosa Sr. one for failing to act on his request for a jail
transfer and the other for the search warrant issued to the Criminal
Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG).

b. In an en banc resolution on Friday, the high court ordered the Office of the
Court Administrator (OCA) to investigate Basey, Samar Presiding Judge
Tarcelo Sabarre Jr. who gave the CIDG two search warrants to enter the
cells of Espinosa and Rolando Yap at the sub-provincial jail on Nov. 4.

1) The tribunal wanted to determine the necessity of issuing the search

warrants “against persons already in custody in a government
detention facility, including the existence of any compelling reasons by
the Basey court.”

2) The court also asked the OCA to probe Baybay, Leyte Presiding Judge
Carlos Arguelles for his failure to act on the motion of Espinosa to
transfer to another detention facility.

3) The magistrates noted that Espinosa filed his motion as early as Oct. 6
and that Arguelles had even inspected his jail cell on Oct. 26 and yet
the motion was never acted on even though it normally took a day to
act on such motion.

c. Suspicious circumstances. Espinosa was killed, along with his co-

accused Raul Yap, by CIDG operatives in what they claimed was a
shootout on Nov. 5 or just hours after they got the search warrants from
Sabarre.

d. Bothered by the suspicious circumstances surrounding the killings, the

high court acted motu proprio and ordered the OCA to determine if
Sabarre and Arguelles’ actions “had any possible connection between the
failure to resolve the deceased Espinosa Sr.’s motion for transfer of
detention, the application and service of search warrants, the procedure
for service of such warrants, and the ensuing deaths of Espinosa Sr. and
Yap.”

ISSUE:

Whether or not the death of Mayor Rolando Espinosa Sr. is a rub out as
premeditated by the CIDG Region 8 raiding team.

DISCUSSION:

Based on the aforementioned facts and testimonies made available to the public
and researched through online media, there are 3 sub-issues that need to be
13
answered by investigators in order to arrive on the resolution of the main issue.
The search warrant obtained, the firefight that allegedly ensued, and the affidavit
made by Mayor Espinosa before he was killed.

1. The Search Warrant

As per Section 1 Rule 126 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, a

search warrant is an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the
Philippines, signed by a judge and directed to a peace officer, commanding him
to search for personal property described therein and bring it before the court.

Based on initial and progress reports from CIDG Region 8 police, a team
composed of CIDG and Highway Patrol Group (PNP) personnel led by Chief
Inspector Leo Lagara entered the Leyte sub-provincial jail at around 4:10 am on
November 5. They were there to serve two search warrants against Espinosa
and Yap. It was Lagara who requested the warrants from the court secured
based on the statement of witness and former inmate Paul Olendan. who
allegedly entered the Baybay Leyte sub-provincial jail on October 28, 2016 and
saw and met Espinosa and Yap. [20] Both warrants were issued by Judge
Tarcelo Sabarre Jr. of the Regional Trial Court branch 30 in Basey, Samar.

The narration of events with regard to the search warrant raises the following
questions.

a. Is a search warrant issued against a person confined in a jail valid?

b. Why was the search warrant necessary in this instant case?
c. Why did the CIDG get the warrant from Basey, Samar and not Tacloban
City or Baybay City, which are nearer the jail?
d. Why did the police decide to serve the warrant in the wee hours of the
morning?
e. Why weren’t top police officials privy to the operation involving a person as
prominent as Mayor Espinosa?

To give light to these questions, the following sub-discussions are hereby

presented.

a. Section 4. Rule 126 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure for

requisites for issuing search warrant. A search warrant shall not issue
except upon probable cause in connection with one specific offense to be
determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or
affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and the things to be
seized which may be anywhere in the Philippines.

The normal procedure is that search warrants normally can be served against a
private property. However, the law does not exempt government facilities from
search warrants. The sub-provincial jail is run by the provincial government of
Leyte, therefore, to answer the first question, it is but fair to state that “a search
warrant issued against a person confined in a jail is valid.”
_______________________________

[20] NBI: Espinosa killing a rubout /By Anjo Alimario, CNN Philippines / Updated 19:56 PM PHT Tue, December 6, 2016.

b. Section 2, Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Provides that

“the right of the people to be secure in their houses, papers, and effects
against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for
any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest
shall issue except upon a probable cause to be determined personally by
14
 the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant
and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place
to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

The said constitutional provision simply means that search and seizure to the
house and property of a person can only be made if there is a lawful reason and
if the person conducting the search and seizure is authorized to do so, that is, if
he is armed with a search warrant.

The term “search” in relation to searches and seizures is an examination of a

man’s dwelling or his other premises, or an examination to the man himself with
the purpose of discovering property which is considered as contraband, illegal, or
stolen or which can be used as an evidence to prove his guilt in the prosecution
of a criminal offense that which he was charged. On the other hand, “seizure” is
the physical taking of the property subject of a valid search into the custody of
the law.

Hence, search warrants are required under the law to protect an individual
against unreasonable searches and seizures and his right to privacy. Since
Espinosa was in jail, it is an understatement to say that he had lost that right
within the jail cell and that searches of jail cells are conducted regularly without
the need for a warrant.

Therefore, it is but correct to state that although the search warrant issued
against Espinosa is valid, it is however not necessary if the sole purpose is to
search for the gun allegedly possessed by him while in jail.

If CIDG opted to choose the use of search warrant to seize the gun allegedly
possessed by Espinosa, instead of proper coordination with the warden of
Baybay sub-station jail due to either lack of trust to the latter, or utmost
confidentiality of the operation, and granting further that the search warrant is
valid, then the test of good faith in securing such warrant is the manner of its
execution. Were operational procedures carried out properly?

c. Section 8 Rule 126 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure -

Search of house, room, or premise to be made in presence of two
witnesses. No search of a house, room, or any other premise shall be
made except in the presence of the lawful occupant thereof or any
member of his family or in the absence of the latter, two witnesses of
sufficient age and discretion residing in the same locality.

In the case at bar, based on the PIAS report, the CIDG-8 team led by Chief Insp.
Leo D. Laraga arrived at the facility about 3:20 a.m. last Saturday. When one of
the jail guards was about to open the gate, the raiding team barged in and
ordered them and the four provincial policemen tasked to secure Espinosa to
kneel and face the wall. They were also disarmed while the raiding team went to
cells number 1 and 7 where Espinosa and Yap were detained. The five co-
inmates of Yap were told to transfer to another cell, leaving Yap alone with the
policemen. They later heard gunshots.

Inmates in cell number 2 which was adjacent to the cell where Espinosa was
detained, were told to transfer another cell. They told the PIAS that they saw two
armed men going inside Espinosa’s cell and talked to the mayor. Then they
heard gunshots.

15
Therefore, in this instant case, requirements in implementing the search warrant
to Espinosa were not followed, as there was not a single witness present during
the time the two armed men went inside the cell of Espinosa and allegedly
served the warrant. Inmates detained in another cell only heard gunshots.

CIDG Region 8 chief Superintendent Marvin Marcos said that Lagara had asked
for clearance to conduct the operation on Friday after the CIDG team got the
necessary search warrants from the Samar Regional Trial Court Branch 30 in
Basey, Samar.

The CIDG team is based in Tacloban City, which is roughly an hour’s drive away
from Basey. Baybay City, where the jail is located, is more than 3 hours away by
car from Basey.

Whether or not a court may take cognizance of an application for a search

warrant in connection with an offense committed outside its territorial boundary
and, thereafter, issue the warrant to conduct a search on a place outside the
court's supposed territorial jurisdiction, is clearly answered by the Sipreme Court
in the hereinafter discussion.

“This court is of the further belief that the possible leakage of information
which is of utmost importance in the issuance of a search warrant is
secured (against) where the issuing magistrate within the region does not
hold court sessions in the city or municipality, within the region, where the
place to be searched is located. The reason why confidentiality is
imposed in search warrant hearing in infringement cases is not hard to
discern: to prevent the defendant or the expected adverse party prior
notice for him to be able to hide, remove, or destroy the evidence. X x
x. The foregoing situations may also have obtained and were taken into
account in the foreign judicial pronouncement that, in the absence of
statutory restrictions, a justice of the peace in one district of the county
may issue a search warrant to be served in another district of the county
and made returnable before the justice of still another district or another
court having jurisdiction to deal with the matters involved. In the present
state of our law on the matter, we find no such statutory restrictions both
with respect to the court which can issue the search warrant and the
enforcement thereof anywhere in the Philippines.” [21]

This brings us, accordingly, to the third question on the permissible jurisdictional
range of enforcement of search warrants procured from Basey Samar to be
executed in Baybay City to avoid possible leakage of information.

In both criminal and civil seizures, the warrant may be served generally during
day time, in the latter, the time is even specified to be between 8:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. and only on weekdays. In both, it may be served at “any time of the day or
night”: in the case of criminal search, where the affidavit supporting the
_______________________________

[21] G.R. No. 104879 May 6, 1994 ELIZALDE MALALOAN and MARLON LUAREZ, vs. COURT OF APPEALS; HON. ANTONIO J. FINEZA,
in his capacity as Presiding Judge, Branch 131, Regional Trial Court of Kalookan City; HON. TIRSO D.C. VELASCO, in his capacity as
Presiding Judge, Branch 88, Regional Trial Court of Quezon City; and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

application “asserts that the property is on the person or in the place ordered to
be searched,” and in case of infringement, “for compelling reasons stated in the
application and duly proved” during the hearing of the said application.[22]

16
In criminal searches, the fear is that if the search could not be served at any time
of the day or night, the respondent might be able to remove the subject articles
during nighttime or that the same is being carried only at nighttime by the person
to be searched. [44- Pineda, The Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure 619
[2003 ed.)], however, the exceptions allowing search at nighttime is obviously
made to prevent the warrants from being useless, the preservation of the
offending articles being the primary consideration for such extraordinary writs.

Hence, the search warrants procured against Espinosa and Yap were served by
CIDG policeman during wee hours in the morning.

During the PNP Internal Affairs Service's preliminary interviews, CIDG operatives
denied their failure to coordinate with the regional police headquarters. The CIDG
said they sent a text message to the regional headquarters to inform them about
the operation. But PNP Eastern Visayas director Chief Superintendent Elmer
Beltejar said they received the text at 4:26 a.m., when the CIDG operation was
already over. Beltejar said the standard procedure is for police operations to be
coordinated personally with his office

According to the Department of Interior and Local Government Secretary Ismael

D. Sueno that while Espinosa and Yap are high-profile inmates, the police still
need to stick to operation protocol and respect the rights of suspects, unless their
lives are in danger, thus ordered the PNP to investigate the incident immediately.

Clearly, CIDG Region 8 did not follow standard operating procedures in

undertaking this operation and in serving the search warrant to Espinosa and
Yap, that even PNP Eastern Visayas director Chief Superintendent Elmer
Beltejar confessed that they received the text at 4:26 a.m., when the CIDG
operation was already over when personal coordination with his office is the
required standard procedure for such operation prior to execution.

Hence, the intentional act of CIDG Region 8 policemen in deviating from

standard procedure in serving the search warrants to high profile inmates such
as Espinosa and Yap, creates an undeniable suspicion on the real motive of
securing said warrants.

2. The Firefight

According to the initial report on the operation, a “firefight” ensued between

Espinosa and Yap, and the police as the warrant was being served.

Crime scene investigators seized a caliber .45 handgun and a magazine with live
ammunition from the cell of Yap. From Espinosa, police said they recovered a
caliber .38 pistol, one magazine with live ammunition, and a sealed sachet
containing what they presumed to be shabu. From Yap’s cell they also seized 10
heated sachets containing different sizes of heat-sealed sachets containing
shabu.

_______________________________

[22] A.M. No. 02-1-06-SC, Section 10

The closed circuit television footage of the encounter, however, is missing. CIDG
officials supposedly took it themselves.

However, on the other version of the story, the inmate claimed that the CIDG
officials almost simultaneously fired at Espinosa and Yap in their cells. Espinosa
17
allegedly begged the officials not to plant evidence in his cell, according to the
inmate. CCTV footage of the incident remains missing. During the PNP Internal
Affairs Service's preliminary interviews, CIDG operatives denied their failure to
coordinate with the regional police headquarters.

Moreover, the CIDG Region 8 raiding team said they sent a text message to the
regional headquarters to inform them about the operation. But PNP Eastern
Visayas director Chief Superintendent Elmer Beltejar said they received the text
at 4:26 a.m., when the CIDG operation was already over.

With the different versions that came out, that of the testimonies of jail guards
and inmates, which contradict the version of the raiding team. As well as the
results of the NBI and Senate Investigations that gear towards possibilities of
“rub out”, rather than shoot out, as claimed by CIDG Region 8 team.

The official autopsy report as well as the manner in the execution of search
warrant shall determine the good or bad faith of the executioner and shall speak
as to which among the different versions of stories shall have the nearest facts if
not to pinpoint the real story behind Espinosa’s death.

The official autopsy speaks that The medico-legal officer of the Criminal
Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) said Albuera Mayor Rolando Espinosa
was shot four times — twice in the chest and twice in the abdominal region.

Police chief inspector Benjamin Lara noted, three of the wounds had an upward
bullet trajectory — this means Espinosa was either standing up or lying down
when he was shot dead.

During the Senate investigation on Espinosa's killing on Thursday, Lara said in

his testimony: "In this case your honor, there are two possible positions for the
victim and the assailant. One the victim could be in a vertical position, if he was
standing and the assailant or the tip of the barrel of the gun was at a point lower
than the point of entry of the body of the victim, this would mean that the victim
was on an elevated position relative to the assailant. Or it could also be that the
assailant was standing and the victim was laying down."

This testimony and opinion of Lara as an expert witness to the autopsy report of
Espinosa’s death only convey inconsistencies in the testimonies of the members
of the CIDG team who served the search warrant on Espinosa.

Moreover, during the PNP Internal Affairs Service's preliminary interviews, CIDG
operatives denied their failure to coordinate with the regional police
headquarters. The CIDG said they sent a text message to the regional
headquarters to inform them about the operation. But PNP Eastern Visayas
director Chief Superintendent Elmer Beltejar said they received the text at 4:26
a.m., when the CIDG operation was already over.

Magalong admitted that Marcos and his team violated the police standard
operating procedures and the conditions set by the judge in the warrant. This is
a clear deviation from the standard operation procedure intentionally made by the
CIDG team which undeniably gives the presumption of their bad faith in securing
the search warrant in order to execute their premeditated plan with the use of the
warrant to give the killing a cloak of legitimacy. It is just a simple question of
“why do they need to go through the trouble of applying the warrant when in fact
the mayor was already locked up in a government facility?” Unless of course,
they had planned for the encounter way in advance to go through such trouble.

And with the unfolding of events based on the different version of reports,
investigations, testimonies and circumstantial evidences, it merely highlights a
18
most disturbing development of this case involving men in uniform in a
premeditated rubout with whom the burden of proof to defy such charge is
entrusted.

3. The Affidavit

Before he was killed, Espinosa executed several affidavits. Among the early
affidavits was one done in Camp Crame, where he claimed that Espenido was
threatening his life.

Ironically, a few weeks later, Espinosa returned to Albuera and vowed to

cooperate with investigators in the town. He was eventually taken under the
protective custody of the Albuera police led by Espenido himself.

Before the Albuera police, Espinosa executed two affidavits detailing what he
knew about Kerwin’s illegal operations. In the document, the late mayor cited
personal knowledge and records from Kerwin’s notebook of transactions, as
proof of his claims.

In the first affidavit, which he executed some time in August, he named over 50
people – from politicians to police to barangay leaders – with supposed links to
illegal drugs. These people either received “protection money” from Kerwin or
had asked for a favor at one point or another.

In a second affidavit, signed only on October 3, 2016, Espinosa went into the
details of the cash or gifts the supposed names in the payroll received. Majority
of the cops on the list were posted in either Ormoc City or Albuera.

Throughout October, Albuera police filed cases before the Ombudsman and the
PNP’s Internal Affairs service against several personalities named in Espinosa’s
affidavit. With that being said, there is also this presumption that over 200
people who may want to kill Espinosa before he incriminates them further

The effect of Espinosa’s death to the affidavit he executed is that it lost its
probative value with, although it could be used to corroborate testimonies of
other witnesses, especially that of Kerwin Espinosa by executing his own
affidavit. The only danger of using the affidavit of Espinosa in court is that, it
would be open to questions by the defense counsels during cross examination.
And now that Espinosa is dead, absence any corroboration, his affidavit will just
be hearsay.

Interconnections of Espinosa’s affidavit to this instant case.

The head of the CIDG Region 8 raiding team, Superintendent Marvin Marcos has
a lot to answer for, given the fact that his relative, journalist Lalaine Jimenea, was
in the list of names allegedly involved in illegal drugs provided by Espinosa.
Jimenea is a correspondent for The STAR in Leyte.

Likewise, alleged Eastern Visayas drug lord Kerwin Espinosa, had claimed at the
Senate inquiry that Marcos solicited P3 million from him to fund the mayoral bid
of the police officer's wife in May 2016.

With this information, it was highly questionable for Marcos to take part in the
operation when his relative was allegedly involved with Espinosa.

Chief Insp. Jovie Espenido, Albuera police chief, said he was the one who
assisted Espinosa in executing his affidavit. Espenido said Senator Leila De
19
Lima was in the list and her involvement was confirmed by Espinosa’s son
Roland Kevin, who allegedly saw her on two separate occasions. Mayor
Espinosa himself confirmed that he saw De Lima personally at a restaurant in
Dampa along Macapagal Boulevard in Pasay City where Kevin said P8 million in
cash was delivered to her.

Also in the affidavit of Espinosa was Superintendent Santi Noel Matira, who had
an entry under the name of “Sir Atiram.” Matira is one of the leaders of CIDG
Region 8 e raiding team who incidentally, was the one who called for the SOCO
team even before Espinosa and another inmate, Raul Yap were killed.

All of these allegations were stated in Espinosa’s executed affidavit, hence, the
prime witness in all these cases. Therefore, Espinosa’s death weakens his
testimony and favors those implicated in the list. This is one likely reason why he
was killed as well as serve as a warning to his son Kerwin who is tagged as the
real drug lord.

RESOLUTION:

In a terse account of the operation's outcome, the CIDG PRO 8 report said:
"Implementation resulted to the death of Mayor Rolando E. Espinosa and Raul
Yap." Such implementation of serving the search warrant is not a failure since
the real intention of such warrant is to circumvent the law, as evidently shown by
the numerous irregularities intentionally committed by the CIDG raiding team.

1. Search warrant maliciously secured.

Art. 129 of the Revised Penal Code. Search warrants maliciously obtained,
and abuse in the service of those legally obtained. — In addition to the
liability attaching to the offender for the commission of any other offense, the
penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its
minimum period and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon
any public officer or employee who shall procure a search warrant without just
cause, or, having legally procured the same, shall exceed his authority or use
unnecessary severity in executing the same.

a. By procuring a search warrant without just cause. In the case at bar,

the CIDG raiding team, that secured the Search Warrant issued Basey,
Samar Presiding Judge Tarcelo Sabarre Jr. who gave the CIDG two
search warrants against Espinosa and Rolando Yap on November. 4,
2016 were issued without just cause.

The true test of lack of just cause is whether the affidavit filed in support of the
application for search warrant has been drawn in such a manner that perjury
could be charged thereon and affiant be held liable for damages caused. The
oath required must refer to the truth of the facts within the personal
knowledge of the applicant for search warrant or his witnesses, not of the
facts "reported to me by a person whom I consider to be reliable." (Alvarez vs.
Court, et al., 64 Phil. 33)

The fact that the search warrants were obtained because they believed
that Espinosa and Yap kept firearms and illegal drugs in their cells, is
circumstantial evidence of illegal procurement of search warrant. Based
on NBI report the application for a search warrant was based on the false

20
 statement of witness and former inmate Paul Olendan. According to
probers, Olendan's supposed testimony that he entered the facility never
really happened. NBI explained Olendan reported to the school where he
worked the day he allegedly saw and met Espinosa and Yap. His daily
time record and biometrics data showed his attendance at work.
Moreover, NBI also recommended perjury charges against the group’s
informant, Paul Olendan, whose affidavit was the basis of a search
warrant against Espinosa.

b. By exceeding his authority or by using unnecessary severity in

executing a search warrant legally procured. Granting however that
the search warrant was validly obtained by the CIDG team and assuming
further that it was issued by the judge with probable cause, but with the
irregularities committed by the raiding team in the execution of search
warrants, still made them feloniously liable for the violation of Article 129 of
the Revised penal Code.

These irregularities include failure to observe standard operating

procedure for police operation by intentional defiance to personally
coordinate with the PNP office. PNP Eastern Visayas Director Chief
Superintendent Elmer Beltejar admitted that they received the text at 4:26
a.m., when the CIDG operation was already over, when the standard
procedure for police operations is to have it be coordinated personally with
his office.

Another irregularity committed by the raiding team was their intentional

failure to observe standard operating procedure for police operation was
the malicious and questionable act made by the CIDG team in calling
SOCO, before the crime happened. The SOCO was called in at 3:49 a.m.
but the CIDG operatives only entered the jail at 4:30 a.m. The shootout
supposedly happened after that.

Failure to coordinate with the jail warden or jail guards is also a clear
evidence of CIDG team’s abuse of authority in executing a valid search
warrant. The jail guards on duty that early Saturday said CIDG officials
disarmed them and four members of the Leyte Provincial Public Safety
Company who were assigned to the jail and its premises. They said the
CIDG personnel asked them to kneel and face the wall outside the jail's
main building.

c. Search of house, room or premise to be made in presence of two

witnesses. (Sec. 8, Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
“No search of a house, room, or any other premise shall be made except in
the presence of the lawful occupant thereof or any member of his family or in
the absence of the latter, two witnesses of sufficient age and discretion
residing in the same locality.”

2. Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code states that Murder is the unlawful
killing of any person which is not parricide or infanticide, provided that any of
the following circumstances is present: X x x. With evident premeditation;.

3. Elements of murder: With the foregoing discussions above stated, the

instant case is carries with it the four (4) elements of murder. (1) That a
Espinosa and Yap were killed, (2) that the CIDG team killed them, (3) that the
killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Art.

21
 248, in this case, there was an evident premeditation, and (4) the killing is not
parricide or infanticide.

And since all members of the CIDG raiding team acted in concert in killing
Espinosa, they had planned for the encounter way in advance to go through
the trouble of applying for a warrant when in fact the mayor was already
locked up in a government facility, and decided to implement it at such an
ungodly hour. It is hereby established that there was a conspiracy amongst
the members of the raiding team to summary execute or rub out Espinosa by
hiding in the shadow of a search warrant to give the planned execution a
cloak of legitimacy.

Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement

concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. (Art. 8, par. 2
of the RPC) of It is well-settled that a person may be convicted for the criminal
act of another where, between them, there has been conspiracy or unity of
purpose and intention in the commission of the crime charged. [23]

On the qualifying circumstances for murder. Different versions of reports

based on separate investigation conducted by the different government
agencies he prosecution likewise proved beyond reasonable doubt that there
was an evident premeditation. The essence of evident premeditation is that
the execution of the criminal act must be preceded by cool thought and
reflection upon the resolution to carry out the criminal intent during a space of
time sufficient to arrive at a calm judgment. For it to be appreciated, the
following must be proven beyond reasonable doubt: (1) the time when the
accused determined to commit the crime; (2) an act manifestly indicating that
the accused clung to his determination; and (3) sufficient lapse of time
between such determination and execution to allow him to reflect upon the
circumstances of his act.

By the initial act of securing a malicious search warrant, up to the non-

observance of standard operating procedure of police operation, in order for
the team to execute the planned rub-out, with no single member showed any
opposition against any deviation from said standard procedure in any stages
of the act, that leads to the killing of Espinosa and Yap, it clearly established
fact that with the entire duration of the execution of the plan, the entire raiding
team clung to their determination to the planned conspiracy amongst the
accused to kill Espinosa and Yap. Finally, since there were sufficient time and
opportunities for the members for cool thought and reflection prior to killing of
the detainees, and nobody retracted from such plan, the presence of all three
(3) elements of evident premeditation are clearly established.

Lastly, the Court is convinced that there was also abuse of superior strength — 2
jail detainees whether armed or unarmed, against a 24-men team well equipped
with high powered firearms and in full-battle gear, there is undoubtedly a
notorious inequality of forces between the victims and the aggressor, assuming a
situation of superiority of strength notoriously advantageous for the aggressors
selected or taken advantage of by them in the commission of the crime.

_______________________________

[23] People vs. Talla, G.R. No. 44414, Jan. 18,1990,181 SCRA 133,148, citing People vs. Ibanez, 77 Phil. 664; People vs. Serrano, L-
45382,

Testimonies by jail warden, jail guards and inmates are evidences that
established the fact that assailants purposely sought the advantage, or that they
had the deliberate intent to use this advantage, thereby making such abuse of

22
superior strength an aggravating circumstance attendant to the crime of Murder
with evident premeditation.

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, this Legal Memorandum finds the

accused members of the CIDG Region 8 raiding team (which includes the 6
members of the Regional Maritime Group) whose names appear on the facts of
this case liable for the crime of MURDER as defined and penalized under
Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, qualified by evident premeditation
and abuse of superior strength, with no mitigating circumstance. Pursuant
to Republic Act No. 9346, banning the imposition of the death penalty, said
accused are hereby recommended to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua
without possibility of parole.

Additionally, said accused members of the CIDG Region 8 raiding team (which
includes the 6 members of the Regional Maritime Group) are also liable for
violation of Articles 129 and 130 of the Revised Penal Code for the search
warrants maliciously obtained, and abuse in the service of those legally obtained
(Art.129), as well as for searching domicile without witnesses (Art. 130) and shall
be recommended to suffer the penalties of arresto mayor in its maximum period
to prision correccional in its minimum period and a fine not exceeding 1,000
pesos (Art.129); and the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and maximum
periods respectively (Art. 130).

23