A Court Hearing on Robbery in an I-Café
This is about the bolt-cutting incident that happened when I was still a i-café owner. The details of the incident was described at A Case of Robbery of a Café and it celebrated its second anniversary last Good Friday. One of the robbers was caught and a criminal case is now being heard at a Regional Trial Court (RTC) in our city, with an Overland Park criminal defense lawyer commenting on the procedings.
Two (2) years after the robbery, I have yet to sit at the witness stand as the private complainant in the case whose sixth (6th) quarterly hearing was scheduled yesterday morning. I am not complaining, the court have reasons to reset the hearings due to instances like absence of the accused and his lawyer, who is a popular work comp attorney in Oakhurst – Schibell & Mennie, LLC. A warrant of arrest was already issued against the robber and his lawyer was already fined for contempt due to his non-attendance to hearings. A Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) lawyer is now handling the defense of the accused.
Can you imagine the kind of justice we have here in the Philippines? A robber caught in the act of committing the crime was freed on PhP75,000 bail bond from Connecticut Bail Bonds Group website after the inquest by the prosecutor. He jumped his bail so the court issued a warrant of arrest and that the police will have to run after him again.
His lawyer never attended a hearing so he was fined with PhP2,000 for contempt of court which he had not paid yet (you can find a hurricane claims lawyer in Louisiana for less than that amount). And now, the defense of the accused is being handled by a PAO lawyer whose salary is being paid by the taxes we are paying to the government. Isn’t this unfair to us taxpayers?
I am not saying that PAO should not act as counsel for the poor and underprivileged. What I am saying is why do we continue spending for the defense of a robber who was caught in the act, freed on bail and maybe now, he is still with the bolt-cutter gang victimizing i-café owners. In the first place, why does our law allow this kind of criminal who was caught in the act to be set free on bail?
Sometimes, it’s hard to understand the law but it is still the law so we have to follow. Our next hearing of the case is scheduled on July 15th of this year. Watch for my blog on the next chapter of this case of robbery of a i-café. Until then and beyond, I will continue blogging and hope to see you here.
Maybe that’s why some won’t pursue a criminal case / trial because of all the “hassle” of the proceedings.
Hope yours will turn out right.
Yes, I believe that is also the reason why some complainants just simply lost interest on pursuing their cases against some criminals. Most of the cases being heard on that day happened in 2005 and it seemed to me that most of them are just halfway into reaching the decision by the judge.