{"id":13879,"date":"2014-06-06T15:17:41","date_gmt":"2014-06-06T07:17:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=13879"},"modified":"2014-06-06T15:17:41","modified_gmt":"2014-06-06T07:17:41","slug":"napoles-to-appeal-denial-of-immunity-bid","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2014\/06\/06\/napoles-to-appeal-denial-of-immunity-bid\/","title":{"rendered":"Napoles to appeal denial of immunity bid"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Alleged<\/a>
Alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles. Photo from Aquino’s official Facebook page.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

MANILA — Despite the justice department’s plan to immediately file charges before the Sandiganbayan, Janet Lim-Napoles’ camp is planning to file a motion for reconsideration before the Office of the Ombudsman to appeal the denial of their bid for Napoles’ immunity.<\/p>\n

In a statement during an interview for the GMA News TV, lawyer Stephen David, Napoles’ legal counsel, insisted that Napoles is “not the most guilty” in the pork barrel scam.<\/p>\n

The statement was made after Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales denied Napoles’ immunity bid saying that evidence shows that Napoles is the most guilty in the scam.<\/p>\n

“Na-deny daw ang immunity [motion] kasi sabi nila, [Napoles] appears to be most guilty. Magpa-file kami ng motion for reconsideration sa Ombudsman at ipapakita [namin] na hindi siya ang most guilty,” David said.<\/span><\/p>\n

(Our immunity (motion) was denied because they are saying that Napoles appears to be the most guilty. We will file a motion for reconsideration before the Ombudsman and we will prove them that she (Napoles) is not the most guilty.)<\/p>\n

David also made a clarification on the issue that Napoles will no longer be submitting documents that will support her claims on the past lawmakers’ involvement in the scam.<\/p>\n

This was after one of Napoles’ lawyers, Bruce Rivera, was quoted saying his client will no longer release the documents.<\/p>\n

Though, David admits that they will only be giving out limited information without the immunity, they will still be supporting the government.<\/p>\n

“In fact, sabi ni Mrs. Napoles, immunity or no immunity, tutulong tayo sa gobyerno. Tuloy pa rin,” he added.<\/span><\/p>\n

(In fact, Mrs. Napoles said that whether or not she will be issued immunity, we will still be helping the government. (We will) continue.)<\/p>\n

He also added that the limitation on the documents that will be released will be done in order to protect his client from self-incrimination.<\/p>\n

“Kung magbibigay ako ng dokumento habang kinakasuhan mo ako, gagamitin mo ang dokumento na ‘yan laban sa akin,” he explained.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

(If I will be giving documents while charges are filed against me, the documents will be used against me.)<\/p>\n

David also said that Napoles’ statements and documents on the pork scam will be vital to push the cases forward.<\/p>\n

With reports from GMA News<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

MANILA — Despite the justice department’s plan to immediately file charges before the Sandiganbayan, Janet Lim-Napoles’ camp is planning to …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":13189,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1482,95],"tags":[4754,1555],"class_list":["post-13879","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-breaking","category-news-ph","tag-bid-for-immunity","tag-napoles","mauthors-lei-fontamillas","mauthors-philippine-canadian-inquirer"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13879","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13879"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13879\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13189"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13879"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13879"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13879"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}