Vhong’s accusers slammed for changing their Statements
The debate on the rape cases against Vhong Navarro is turning into a word war among lawyers as the victims change their original statements regarding the case.
Deniece Cornejo, who played a major role in the extortion and mauling of comedian-host Vhong Navarro by businessman Cedric Lee’s group, changed her earlier statement regarding her rape. She clarified in her latest affidavit that she had been raped twice by Navarro instead of once, the first on 17 January and the second on 22 January.
The second rape complainant Roxanne Cabanero also changed her original statement following the submission of her affidavit, saying she was not raped on the date specified in the affidavit, 24 April 2010. The change was announced after the media found out Vhong was with Vice Ganda in a concert on the said date. Vice also vouched for Vhong by submitting a sworn statement regarding the concert.
These latest revelations further muddle the already conflicting accounts of Vhong, Deniece and Cedric on the issue. Attorney Lorna Kapunan, former counsel for alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles, commented that ‘Hindi ka pwedeng magpalit-palit ng storya.’
Kapunan added that ‘Ang huwes, ang judge ay hindi na maniniwaa sa iyo unless may reasonable explanation kung bakit nagpalit ng storya.’
An affidavit is a notarised legal document that binds a person to the contents of the document. This is because affidavits are to be made upon condition that the contents are factual and are sworn to be true. When changes are made to the original affidavit, the person could easily be charged with perjury or lying under oath.
According to Vhong’s lawyer attorney Alma Mallonga, the fact that the opposite camps are changing their original statements reveal that they are trying to adjust so that they can still counter the evidences that support Vhong’s statement. She went further and said Deniece and Roxanne’s camps were lying and that they are committing perjury, a criminal act that is punishable by imprisonment in the Philippines.
Attorney Mallonga threatened ‘Hindi kami bulag. Nabasa ko, hindi ako tanga, naintindihan ko ang nakalagay doon (sa original affidavit).
‘Hindi ito biro. Nanumpa ka. Ano ‘to lokohan?’
Attorney Virgilio Battalia, Roxanne’s defence lawyer, meanwhile supported his client’s seeming forgetfulness and affirmed they had a strong case against Vhong. Deniece’s counsel Howard Calleja on the otherhand asked the public to give ‘leeway and understanding’ to his client since she was a rape victim.
What do you think about the conflicting statements of Vhong’s accusers? Share your thoughts below.