Victim: Police Officer 2 Jamaron Jandag, an awardee of the Philippine National Police Medal of Valor on 29 January 2007 for fighting off at least 100 members of the Moro Islamic Liberatin Front (MILF) and Abu Sayyaf bandits who attacked the municipal hall and the police station of Siocon, Zamboanga del Norte in May 2003.
Declared Suspects: [POLICEMEN] PO2 Asmad Badlis, PO1 Sukarno Adjod, PO2 Borjan Jawali, PO1 Said Wahid, and PO1 Roderick Magsano, all assigned at the Southern Police District. [CIVILIANS] Nur-Asia Ama (as mastermind; not included in the list of those charged), Burha Abdullah (as hitman), Gamar “Belong” Janihim (later charged as the mastermind) and his wife (Anorah), Aljon “Junjun” Pawai Sala, Haron “Pahambong” Gacao, Gaini “Gani” Wadja, Asman “Abuel” Amilasan, Salim Janihim, Ramili Wahid, Jahim Payao, Hadji Mobin Payao and Majid Adbulhaman (alias “Shariff Larudin”).
Investigating Agency: PNP Criminial Investigation and Detection Group–National Capital Region, headed by Senior Superintendent Isagani Nerez.
Scene of Crime: On 16 March 2009, the body of the victim, already in advanced state of decomposition, was found near a garbage dump in Rodriguez, Rizal.
INVESTIGATION
The plan to murder Sandag was hatched in Labuan, Zamboanga City. But it was PO2 Asmad Badlis and PO1 Sukarno Adjod who planned to stage the killing.
On 25 February 2009, the victim was taken hostage in the Taguig Plaza Apartelle inside 502 room (PNP suspected to have been) rented by Anorah Janihim. All five policemen was seen inside this room.
Ama was seen giving the reward money to Abdulla.
Background. Sandag, then 13 years-old and policeman in Sibuco, Zamboanga del Norte, apparently killed the relatives and kin of the suspects. He was charged of the case but allowed to be a “living-out detainee” at the Siocon Police Station. The plan to kill Sandag began that time.
Police Theory: The main motive on the killing the victim is the existing riduh (family war) between the Sandag and the Payao family. The Payao family vowed to kill all male heirs of the Sandag clan.
OUTCOME
Case Still Open. Five policemen and 13 civilians were charged but all of them are still at large, as of 25 Apr 2009.
Gunshot residue analysis (GRA) is a chemical technique under firearm forensics that attempts to identify heavy metals particles that contaminates the skin of subjects believed to occur only when the subject has fired a gun recently.
Gunshot residue is expelled as tiny particles from the barrel of gun when it is fired. The residue contains heavy metals barium, lead, and antimony.
ASTM International, developer of standards for forensic laboratories, has developed a guide for performing the technique that was approved in the United States in 2001. This states that gunshot residue particles are made only of lead, barium and antimony, but antimony and barium alone are “unique” to gunshot residue. The particles are identified using a scanning electron microscope and their composition analysed using energy-dispersive spectrometry.
Crime laboratory reports however provide a “most probably” result putting into question the reliability of this analysis in concluding that if such heavy metals were detected that the subject indeed fired the gun.
SPECIFIC TESTS
Paraffin Test. The paraffin test is one of the crudest of GRA methods that detects for nitrate residues. It uses liquified paraffin wax interlaced with gauze sheets applied on the hand skin to open up skin pores and collect chemicals inside the pores. When the wax cools, it forms a cast on which lab technicians apply either diphenylamine or diphenylbenzidine. Nitrates will cause blue dots to appear on the casts corresponding to the hand supposedly used to shoot. Reporting: The presence location of the blue dots recorded in drawings that technicians are required to make. Use in Courts: The report is treated as evidence that the suspect had fired a gun. In court, the administering technician testifies on the examination and presents the drawings with the interpretations made. Sources of False Negative Results: The gunpowder burns can be removed from the skin pores using warm vinegar. High temperature opens up the pores and forces out the gunpowder.
SCIENTIFIC STUDIES
However, studies as recent as 2005 have shown that a non-shooter can become contaminated by these heavy metals without firing a gun. Lubor Fojtásek and Tomás Kmjec at the Institute of Criminalistics in Prague, Czech Republic, fired test shots in a closed room and attempted to recover particles 2 metres away from the shooter. They detected “unique” particles up to 8 minutes after a shot was fired, suggesting that someone entering the scene after a shooting could have more particles on them than a shooter who runs away immediately (Forensic Science International, V153, P132). In fact, someone who entered the crime scene within this period can have more particles on them than the shooter who ran away immediately after the crime.
In a 2000 study, Debra Kowal and Steven Dowell at the Los Angeles county coroner’s department reported that it was also possible to be contaminated by police vehicles. Of 50 samples from the back seats of patrol cars, they found 45 contained particles “consistent” with GSR and four had “highly specific” GSR particles. What’s more, they showed that “highly specific” particles could be transferred from the hands of someone who had fired a gun to someone who had not.
Even worse, it is possible to pick up a so-called “unique” particle from an entirely different source. Industrial tools and fireworks are both capable of producing particles with a similar composition to GSR. And several studies have suggested that car mechanics are particularly at risk of being falsely accused, because some brake linings contain heavy metals and can form GSR-like particles at the temperatures reached during braking. In one recent study, Bruno Cardinetti and colleagues at the Scientific Investigation Unit of the Carabinieri (the Italian police force) in Rome found that composition alone was not enough to tell true GSR particles from particles formed in brake linings (Forensic Science International, vol 143, p 1).
HISTORY
In the 1990s, the courts accepted the presence of either two of these heavy metals from the gunshot residue as evidence of firing the firearm. However, today the courts require that all three metals must be present for gunshot residue be admitted as evidence on court.
History of Paraffin Testing
The validity of the paraffin test first came into question in the United States during the Warren Commission hearings of 1963 while investigating the assassination of late US president John F. Kennedy. FBI expert, Cortlandt Cunningham, testified that a laboratory experiment conducted by the agency determine the test is inconclusive.
In the study 17 men were made to fire five shots of a .38 cal. revolver using one hand only. After each string, both hands were subjected to paraffin testing. Results on eight of the test subjects showed negative or essentially negative results on both hands. This indicates that paraffin tests could not detect nitrates half the time. More surprisingly, three men showed positive results on the idle hand and negative on the firing hand. Four men tested positive on both hands, after having fired only with their right hand.
In the Philippines, paraffin testing has faced much scrutiny as well. Its unreliability as evidence was discussed in the SC’s conviction of Claudio Teehankee Jr on 6 Oct 1995 for the 1991 murder of Maureen Hultman, the killing of Roland John Chapman and the frustrated murder of Jussi Olavi Leino. At the lower court and the Court of Appeals, Teehankee capitalized on the negative paraffin test on him.
However the High Court ruled: “Scientific experts concur in the view that the paraffin test has ‘proved extremely unreliable in use. The only thing that it can definitely establish is the presence or absence of nitrates or nitrites on the hand. It cannot be established from this test alone that the source of the nitrates or nitrites was the discharge of a firearm.” It added: “We have also recognized several factors which may bring about the absence of gunpowder nitrates on the hands of a gunman, viz: when the assailant washes his hands after firing the gun, wears gloves at the time of the shooting, or if the direction of a strong wind is against the gunman at the time of firing.”
The Teehankee ruling revealed other sources of nitrate/nitrite contaminants such as firecrackers, fertilizers, pharmaceuticals and leguminous plants such as peas, beans, alfalfa, and tobacco.
National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) forensic chemist Leonora Vallado testified that excessive perspiration or washing of hands with the use of warm water or vinegar may remove gunpowder nitrates on the skin.
Much earlier court decisions proceeded on the same vein such as the People v. Ducay (1993), People v. Hubilo, (1993), People v. Pasiliao (1992), People v. Clamor (1991), People v. Talingdan (1990), and People v. Cajumocan (2004).
The High Court concluded that paraffin test is “of lesser consequence.”
TRENDS
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is more cautious in their protocol for GRA–“Because the possibility of secondary transfer exists, at least three unique particles must be detected…in order to report the subject/object/surface ‘as having been in an environment of gunshot primer residue’.” So a person could be named as a potential shooter in Baltimore, but given the benefit of the doubt by the FBI.
In the Philippines, the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled paraffin test as inconclusive and cannot be used as the sole basis in determining whether the subject fired the firearm.
SOURCES
Mejia, Robin: “Why we can’t rely on firearm forensics,” New Scientist, 23 Nov 2005
KNR: “SC finds limited value in paraffin tests,” Sun Star Cebu, 19 Apr 2009
Investigating Agencies. Quezon City Police District (QCPD), National Bureau of Investigation (NBI)
Scene of Crime.Shooting occurred at the victim’s residence on 27 General Aquino Street, Tierra Pura Subdivision, Tandang Sora, Quezon City. There were traces of blood found at the master’s bedroom, despite Mario initially asking invetigators not to go to the bedroom. These blood traces appeared not to be more than blood traces.
When Mario arrived from work, he went upstairs to check for her wife. He might have not found her in the Master’s bedroom because he went to her daughter Katrina’s room which was locked from the inside. He went down to ask househelp Carlota to get the key to Katrina’s. With the key, he asked Carlota to accompany him in opening the room. They were not able to find the victim inside the room but the rest room was locked from the inside. Mario asked Carlota to get the key for the rest room downstairs.
When they opened the rest room door, the victim was bathed in her own blood.
Police said that Mario friend and businessman Delfin Lee, a major ABS-CBN sponsor who donated houses as prizes, was in the house during the shooting incident. Text messages that circulated alleged that Lee helped Mario carry the dead body of the wounded victim to one of the bathrooms inside the house. But Lee denied his presence there.
Observations from the QCPD include: (1) Mario asked the police not to go to the master bedroom of the house (from statements of chief superintendent Franklin Moises Mabanag). Police said to have found bloodstains in the master bedroom and the bedcovers were already clean at 3 PM QCPD arrival; (2) Point of impact of the bullet got located at the back of the toilet bowl in the bathroom (from statements of deputy CIDU chief Gerardo Ratuita); (3) no signs of blood splattered in the bathroom (from statements of deputy CIDU chief Ratuita).
Earlier, Ratuita explained to reporters that there were no signs of blood having splattered the bathroom walls despite the bullet having entered the left temple and exited the right temple.
He said that the slug was deformed, an indication that it had hit a hard object.
Wound.The bullet wound entered the left temple and exited in the right. Shooting occured at 10:30 AM on 15 April 2009. There is burning at the bullet’s entry point, indicating a close-ranged gunshot.
Gun. The slug recovered was deformed, indicating that it had hit a blunt object after passing through Trinidad’s head. There was no bullet marks on the wall of the bathroom where the victim was found. The bullet’s trajectory was downward. The point of ricochet was near the floor and investigators were puzzled why the point of ricochet was not level with the supposed point of entry of the bullet.
Mabanag said investigators have located the point of ricochet of the bullet behind the toilet bowl near the area where the victim was shot.
INVESTIGATION
At the time of the incident Mario was hosting his daily morning radio program on dzMM and the station has tapes to prove it.
A gardener and a housemaid at a nearby house did not hear a gunshot from Etong’s residence.
The Apaceble and Bolleser cleaned the bathroom where the victim was found while Ponan cleaned the Mitsubishi Pajero (license plate XPE-293) used to bring the victim to the hospital (New Era General Hospital) on their own initiative, not under orders of Mario. Mario, Ponan and Pamela (victim’s sister) brought the victim to the hospital.
Members of the household also claimed the gun (caliber .380 Walther PPK pistol) used in the shooting was found on the right side of the victim when she was discovered slumped inside the bathroom of the couple’s child on the second floor of the house.
Mario surrendered the gun to QCPD. He directly ordered the driver and the housemaids not to talk to the police. He had no scratch on his face nor bruise on his nose (superintendent Franklin Moises Mabanag, chief of CIDG, reported Mario had “scratches on his face and the bruised nose”).
The suspects tested negative for gunpowder burns and nitrates. But the victim too tested negative.
The victim made a financial investment which failed.
ANALYSIS
Indicators of Suicide
There is no clear motive yet for the husband to perform the crime, even indirectly. Losing that much money did not appear to trouble him; in fact, he appeared nonchalant about it and encourage his wife to let the loss go. He told his wife they could cope with the loss being once poor.
Indicators of Crime
The house personnel cannot still be cleared for lack of motive.
The negative result for gunpowder burns and nitrates on the victim is an important information to consider if the test used is high reliability. Should suicide happened it would be inevitable that the victim would have tested positive. And since the suspects also tested negative, the results can indicate that someone who knows how to remove gunpowder and nitrate traces on the suspect skin must have done it.
However this is under the assumption that the paraffin test could reliably detect true act of gun firing, or at least pick up residues of gunpowder in samples. If the test is unreliable, then a negative result could not indicate either absence or presence of crime. Cautious law enforcement should have not used a test that is unreliable in the first place because of its potential to introduce so much confusion in understanding other evidences.
Still Neutral Facts
The direct order on house personnel not to talk to the police can be presumed to “when” not in the presence of a lawyer.
The extent of unreliability of the paraffin test determines how far the results on the suspects can be of use. If extremely unreliable, the test was unnecessary and only introduced confusion into the case.
REMARKS
Escape Nonsense. The accusation made by QCPD chief Vimar Barcellano of Mario’s “escape” was inappropriate and would have been avoided if he considered the humane side of the situation–a husband needs to be with his dying wife even if he was one of the suspects. This could have been avoided had Barcellano allowed Mario to go to the hospital accompanied with enough police personnel to secure him.
This QCPD attitude inevitably led to the QCPD blunder on 16 April 2009 when police operatives forcefully arrested the members of the Etong household and the Arteche siblings inside the hospital. DILG secretary and Napolcom chairman Reynaldo Puno and former president Joseph Estrada echoed this disappointment on 20 April 2009. Senators Panfilo Lacson and Francis Pangilinan voiced their displeasure earlier.
Gag Order. It would be a waste of time to file chargers against Mario on the direct gag order because it is proper that a lawyer needs to be around in the questioning. And it is also folly to proceed with this line of action, and on this time they can use to look for the real culprit if the case is not suicide.
QCPD Blunders. On 20 April 2009, QCPD superintendet Franklin Mabanag (chief of the QCPD-Criminal Investigation and Detection Unit) and his deput Gerardo Ratuita were relieved of their duties pending results of investigation conducted by the National Police Commission over the alleged foreceful arrest of members of the Etong household.
This happened when QCPD personnel used excessive force in arresting Pamela Arteche and his brother Maximo (both are siblings of the victim) inside New Era General Hospital on 16 April 2009. Four other members of the CIDU have been earlier suspended for their involvement in the arrest. Too much enthusiasm and ignorance can be very dangerous indeed.
The QCPD has filed an obstruction of justice suit against the suspects without apparent review on the reasons why the househelpers did so. The present handling of NBI which provides benefit of the doubt on the househelpers for the cleaning should have been the line of approach that QCPD pursued. “We want to know why was it tampered. Was it intentional or was it done so as not to scare the kid (younger child of the Failons) there as they claimed? We will look into that,” said Arnel Dalumpines, head agent of the task force created to investigate the case.
On 17 April 2009, a report came out that reflects the QCPD attitude towards the case and Mario himself. The police behaviors causing suspicions include: (1) QCPD officers took group pictures and giggled behind Mario, while Mario took the paraffin test; (2) Fact-finding interview of Mario at Camp Karingal took 7 hours beyond the one-houre schedule to finish.
On 5 May 2009, the charges for obstruction of justice was dismissed by the Quezon City Prosecutor’s Office because of insufficient evidence.
NBI Takeover.On 20 April 2009, NBI took over the lead in investigating the case. The first move of NBI leadership in allowing Mario to first grieve for his wife’s death, before involving him in the investigation, is a laudable one, and shows great professionalism in the agency. This development occurred at the heel of an ongoing investigation of the QCPD-CIDU blunders.
Indicators of Suicide: There are however indications that support suicide: (1) The money lost was huge and likely the investment was made without Mario knowing it. Thus the written apology letter. (2) The obvious state of mind of the victim before the shooting happened.
Indicators of Crime: But indications has surfaced on possible case of murder or homicide: (1) The victim tested negative in the paraffin test (which is impossible if suicide occurred) unless the body was cleaned thoroughly and effectively before samples were taken out.
UPDATES
NBI Says “It’s Suicide.” On 21 May 2009, NBI concluded its that Trinidad Etong committed suicide.
Rap vs. QCPD. Failon lawyer, Atty. Alfredo Molo, also announced that talks will start on the filing of case for violent arrest of the Failon household members against QCPD. The policemen also insinuated that Failon killed his own wife based on insufficient evidence. Such an embarassing outcome of incompetence.
Crimes in the Philippines 
You must be logged in to post a comment.