Posted on 03/20/2009 10:27:15 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
CHATAN, Okinawa — The lawyer for a Marine convicted of raping a woman in the Philippines three years ago denies his law firm had anything to do with her decision last week to recant her allegation.
Meanwhile, the senior jurist in the Philippines, Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez, told media Friday that he suspects anti-military groups in the country pressured the woman to pursue rape charges after the Subic Bay incident.
Women’s rights and anti-military activists in the Philippines, however, are claiming the woman’s recantation and subsequent move to the United States raise suspicions that she was coerced by Smith’s lawyers, family or U.S. and Philippine officials to change her story.
Jose Justiniano, who represents Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith in the appeal of his 2006 conviction and 40-year prison sentence, said he was just as surprised as anyone when he read the five-page statement by the 25-year-old woman.
"I had no idea this would happen," he told Stars and Stripes in a telephone interview Friday from Manila. "We had nothing to do with this."
Justiniano said he and another lawyer representing Smith met with the woman, known publicly only as "Nicole," on March 12 after her family contacted him, saying she had fired her attorney and wished to accept the 100,000 pesos in compensatory damages ordered by the trial court when Smith was convicted in December 2006.
"We were pleased by this new development, especially since I had advised my client to make the payment a long time ago," Justiniano said. "It is a civil matter and not an admission of guilt."
But when they met with Nicole they were in for a surprise.
"The five-page document was totally unexpected," he said.
The statement was notarized by fellow lawyer Abraham Acosta and witnessed by Nicole’s mother and brother.
In her lengthy statement, Nicole said she might have been too drunk to realize what she was doing on Nov. 1, 2005, when she was with Smith and other Marines in a van outside a Subic Bay nightclub.
She said she might have led Smith on and was too scared to admit that the sex might have been consensual after she left the van in disarray and onlookers called police.
"It was a matter of convenience for us to notarize the document," Justiniano said. "We also notarized the document for the payment."
He scoffed at charges Nicole was "bought off" by Smith.
"It was not much money," he said.
The amount is equivalent to about $2,070.
Justiniano said he was constrained by court rules from commenting on what he will do with Nicole’s sworn statement.
Smith, now 23, is being held on the U.S. Embassy compound in Manila pending his appeal and negotiations between the U.S. and the Philippines concerning the country’s Supreme Court ruling in February that holding the Marine at the embassy was a violation of the Visiting Forces Agreement.
Opponents of the VFA say that if Nicole’s recantation eventually results in Smith’s conviction being overturned and his release, it would affect the negotiations by making questions about the legality of the agreement moot.
Liza Maza, leader of the Gabriela Women’s Party and a Philippines legislator, said Thursday that Nicole was a "scapegoat to save the VFA."
During a news conference in Manila, Maza said it was suspicious that Nicole received a visa to live in the United States with her American boyfriend just before she fired her attorney (another women’s rights activist) and recanted her story.
Rebecca Thompson, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Embassy in Manila, said in an e-mail to Stripes that Nicole’s visa was "adjudicated in strict accordance with U.S. laws and regulations."
Thompson referred all questions concerning the rape case, appeal and Nicole’s recent recantation to Philippine judicial officials.
Gonzalez said Friday that Nicole’s statement was "a mere scrap of paper, unless you will be able to convince the court to reopen the trial for admission of newly discovered evidence," according to a Department of Justice spokesman.
He also told reporters that before the start of the trial in 2006, Nicole sought an audience with him asking that certain "meaty portions" of her initial affidavit be stricken, his spokesman said.
"Maybe if that thing was pursued, or if I would have granted an audience to her and her lawyer, this would have never gone to court," Gonzalez said, according to media reports.
Instead of accusing Smith’s lawyers of paying her off, Gonzalez said anti-U.S. military parties might originally have pressured Nicole to pursue the rape allegation.
"It appears to me that we were taken for a ride," he told reporters.
ping
Good Lord.
this was a quid pro quo in exchange for a visa...
that said, the victim was put up to placing the charge against the marines by feminist lawyers and anti American groups who used the charges to try to stop the US soldiers from training here with the Philippines military.
she was drunk and met the marines in a bar, and had sex with smith on the ride home without making any objections...the next morning she changed her mind, and her original story was gang rape against all five marines...
the DNA however only found Smith’s DNA...so he was convicted of rape, even though under Philippine law it would only have been rape if she was unconscious...essentially the court changed the law and convicted Smith to stop the protests.
I have often wondered why the trail judge was not clever enough to see Nicole’s testimony was contrived... Thank goodness the US did not relinquish Cpl Smith to Philippine authorities..we may not be alive today.
spelling bad today.
Only Heaven knows the whole story.
actually, I don’t think she made it up...theoretically it was “date rape” since she was drunk at the time. She didn’t remember what happened, so assumed she was unconscious...she wasn’t, too many witnesses saw her leave with Smith, happily drunk.
But the lawyers and activists used her case to whip up anti American sentiment.Hence the “gang rape” charges. Luckily for the Marines, the feminist lawyer got DNA evidence that only showed Smith’s DNA,, which ruined the case for the anti American left.
and the feminist lawyers used the court case to extend rape to cover “intoxicated” not unconscious...a previous case where a British woman was raped after a date drug was throw out a few years ago.
Without the politics, her family probably would have taken a bribe to drop the complaint...here minor theft and assaults are often handled by such settlements.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.