ON TARGET
US-RP relations in jeopardy
By Ramon Tulfo
Inquirer
Last updated 02:14am (Mla time) 12/16/2006
Published on Page A26 of the December 16, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
DON’T be deceived by Makati Regional Trial Court Judge Benjamin Pozon’s projection of being media-shy, of his seeming reluctance to be lionized.
Deep inside, he’s enjoying all the publicity over his conviction of a US Marine for allegedly raping a Filipino woman, and his adamant stand that the convicted American remain in Philippine custody.
Pozon may be a hero to leftists and women activists, but if you ask the man on the street, he’ll tell you that not only was the judge wrong in convicting Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith, he’s putting US-Philippine relations in jeopardy.
If you don’t believe me, try asking people who are neither militant nor xenophobic (hater of foreigners), which I did. They’ll tell you the victim, “Nicole,” was not raped. She had consensual sex with Smith with whom she was smitten the first time she set eyes on him.
How could there have been rape when Nicole was wearing tight-fitting jeans at that time and Smith had to wear a condom?
If you’re a woman, try taking off your tight jeans inside a car and you’ll know what I mean. If a woman on her own would have difficulty removing her jeans inside a cramped space, how much more her alleged rapist?
A woman friend (not girlfriend) was saved from being raped by a cab driver who forced her into a vacant lot because she wore tight jeans. And, of course, she shouted for help!
Nicole went with Smith in the van, and there was nothing in her statement that she shouted for help. Otherwise, the driver of the van would have testified that she did. She claims she was drunk at the time. So was Smith, who is younger than she is.
Nicole took offense at Smith’s companion calling her a “bitch” and the way she was dumped like a pig by the Americans in the street after she refused to get out of the van. That’s why she complained she was raped.
Since Pozon has already convicted Smith, he wants to have his cake and eat it too by having him remain in Philippine custody despite a provision in the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA).
The VFA provides that American servicemen accused of a crime would remain in US custody pending the outcome of their trial. And the trial, as legal experts interpret it, includes the appeal after conviction.
All that the US government, our country’s friend and ally, wants is for Smith to be confined in the US Embassy while the appeal is ongoing. Can’t we accede to an ally that has helped us tremendously in winning the war against the Abu Sayyaf?
For comments and inquiries please e-mail: isumbongmokaytulfo@yahoo.com
Copyright 2006 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Enough with the grandstanding, Judge. Your fifteen minutes has lapsed. Stop basking in the limelight.
3 comments:
I still have to ask the same question. Medical reports reveal forcible sex. Did the defense counter that by showing reports that argue the contrary?
Why are you concerned with grandstanding? You are quoting an opinion column (i.e., the writer is not necessarily an expert on U.S-Philippine relations or this case). Also, are you more about the case than the judge?
Two points:
1. Rough consensual sex can manifestate forced sexual intercourse (or rape).
2. My only concern is that the judge is enjoying the limelight contrary to his statements. The people who made the VFA have said time and time again that custody should be with the US government until all judicial proceedings have been completed. That being said, the judge should get out of the picture already and hand the American over to US officials.
Post a Comment