{"id":16110,"date":"2014-06-20T15:11:35","date_gmt":"2014-06-20T07:11:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=16110"},"modified":"2014-06-20T15:11:35","modified_gmt":"2014-06-20T07:11:35","slug":"evidence-against-jpe-incomprehensible-jpes-lawyer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2014\/06\/20\/evidence-against-jpe-incomprehensible-jpes-lawyer\/","title":{"rendered":"Evidence against JPE \u2018incomprehensible\u2019\u2014JPE\u2019s lawyer"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_15448\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-15448\" style=\"width: 300px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/06\/Juan-Ponce-Enrile-1.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-15448\" src=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/06\/Juan-Ponce-Enrile-1-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile. Photo courtesy of Enrile's Facebook page.\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/06\/Juan-Ponce-Enrile-1-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/06\/Juan-Ponce-Enrile-1.jpg 960w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-15448\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile. Photo courtesy of Enrile&#8217;s Facebook page.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>MANILA \u2013 Senator Juan Ponce Enrile\u2019s lawyer labelled the government prosecutors\u2019 evidence against the senator as \u2018incomprehensible.\u2019<\/p>\n<p>Lawyer Estelito Mendoza said the documents filed against his client in connection with the plunder case filed before the Sandiganbayan, are hard to understand.<\/p>\n<p>He said during the oral arguments for Enrile\u2019s motion to dismiss, that the documents contain information that are \u201cimpossible for the accused to understand.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Mendoza argued that the prosecutors must have included \u201cultimate facts\u201d not just \u201cconclusion of facts.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>He added that the documents coming from the prosecutors did not even specify who received the alleged pork scam kickbacks given to Enrile.<\/p>\n<p>Enrile was earlier accused of receiving more than P172 million in kickbacks from PDAF projects.<\/p>\n<p>Though the pork barrel scam whistleblowers alleged that the senator\u2019s chief of staff, Gigi Reyes, received the kickbacks, it was not specified in the information filed by the prosecutors.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Who received these money? Is it Enrile or (Gigi) Reyes?&#8221; Mendoza argued.<\/p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the Sandiganbayan said documents for motions filed by Enrile will be submitted for resolution.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>MANILA \u2013 Senator Juan Ponce Enrile\u2019s lawyer labelled the government prosecutors\u2019 evidence against the senator as \u2018incomprehensible.\u2019 Lawyer Estelito Mendoza &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":15448,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1482,1145,95],"tags":[5675,5676],"class_list":["post-16110","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-breaking","category-headline","category-news-ph","tag-case-vs-enrile","tag-incomprehensible","mauthors-lei-fontamillas","mauthors-philippine-canadian-inquirer"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16110","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=16110"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16110\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/15448"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16110"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16110"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16110"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}