Enrile and gigi reyes relationship marketing

'The Boss' and Gigi Reyes

Court of Appeals,34 the Court explained these two concepts in relation to a Gigi Reyes had the full authority to act for and on behalf of Senator Enrile with. The Sandiganbayan earlier issued an arrest warrant for plunder and graft against the senator, his former secretary Lucille “Gigi” Reyes, alleged. This photo of Enrile and his Chief-of-Staff Jessica “Gigi” Reyes has gone viral on Facebook. .. To market to market, to buy a fat pig Now no one in the senate can accuse him of having an affair with his “eyes and ears”.

LawlibraryofCRAlaw The distinction between the elements of the offense and the evidence of these elements is analogous or akin to the difference between ultimate facts and evidentiary facts in civil cases.

Ugnayan umano nina Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile at Atty. Gigi Reyes, kinumpirma ni Mrs. Cristina Enrile

Ultimate facts are the essential and substantial facts which either form the basis of the primary right and duty or which directly make up the wrongful acts or omissions of the defendant, while evidentiary facts are those which tend to prove or establish said ultimate facts.

Whatever facts and circumstances must necessarily be alleged are to be determined based on the definition and the essential elements of the specific crimes. Arraignment The procedural due process mandate of the Constitution requires that the accused be arraigned so that he may be fully informed as to why he was charged and what penal offense he has to face, to be convicted only on showing that his guilt is shown beyond reasonable doubt with full opportunity to disprove the evidence against him.

Oftentimes, this is achieved when the Information alleges the material elements of the crime charged. If the Information fails to comply with this basic standard, it would be quashed on the ground that it fails to charge an offense.

In such instances, the Rules of Court allow the accused to move for a bill of particulars to enable him properly to plead and to prepare for trial. Bill of Particulars In general, a bill of particulars is the further specification of the charges or claims in an action, which an accused may avail of by motion before arraignment, to enable him to properly plead and prepare for trial. In civil proceedings, a bill of particulars has been defined as a complementary procedural document consisting of an amplification or more particularized outline of a pleading, and is in the nature of a more specific allegation of the facts recited in the pleading.

In criminal cases, a bill of particulars details items or specific conduct not recited in the Information but nonetheless pertain to or are included in the crime charged.

What Went Before: Enrile denies Gigi Reyes was ‘other woman’ | Inquirer News

Its purpose is to enable an accused: The motion shall specify the alleged defects of the complaint or information and the details desired. The rule requires the information to describe the offense with sufficient particularity to apprise the accused of the crime charged with and to enable the court to pronounce judgment. The particularity must be such that persons of ordinary intelligence may immediately know what the Information means.

It is not the function of the bill to furnish the accused with the evidence of the prosecution. Thus, the prosecutor shall not be required to include in the bill of particulars matters of evidence relating to how the people intend to prove the elements of the offense charged or how the people intend to prove any item of factual information included in the bill of particulars.

Origin of bill of particulars in criminal cases52redarclaw Even before the promulgation of the Rules of Court, when the applicable rules for criminal procedure was still General Order No.

This recognition came despite the lack of any specific provision in General Order No. Schneer,54 the issue presented was whether a bill of particulars was available in a criminal case for estafa after the accused had already been arraigned.

The Court essentially ruled that there was no specific provision of law expressly authorizing the filing of specifications or bills of particulars in criminal cases, and held that: Cernias,55 however, the Court formally recognized the existence and applicability of a bill of particulars in criminal cases.

In this case, the prosecution filed an information charging Basilio Cernias with several counts of brigandage before the Court of First Instance of Leyte. Abad Santos,58 the court first recognized a bill of particulars, as a right that the accused may ask for from the court. The People of the Philippines filed a petition for certiorari, but the Court dismissed this petition. On the contrary, they will serve to apprise the accused clearly of the charges filed against them, and thus enable them to prepare intelligently whatever defense or defenses they might have.

The Distinctive Role of a Bill of Particulars When allegations in an Information are vague or indefinite, the remedy of the accused is not a motion to quash, but a motion for a bill of particulars. The purpose of a bill of particulars is to supply vague facts or allegations in the complaint or information to enable the accused to properly plead and prepare for trial. It presupposes a valid Information, one that presents all the elements of the crime charged, albeit under vague terms.

JPE and Gigi, SB and Boyet

Notably, the specifications that a bill of particulars may supply are only formal amendments to the complaint or Information. Sandiganbayan,64 the Court expounded on the purpose of a bill of particulars as follows: LawlibraryofCRAlaw It is the office or function, as well as the object or purpose, of a bill of particulars to amplify or limit a pleading, specify more minutely and particularly a claim or defense set up and pleaded in general terms, give information, not contained in the pleading, to the opposite party and the court as to the precise nature, character, scope, and extent of the cause of action or defense relied on by the pleader, and apprise the opposite party of the case which he has to meet, to the end that the proof at the trial may be limited to the matters specified, and in order that surprise at, and needless preparation for, the trial may be avoided, and that the opposite party may be aided in framing his answering pleading and preparing for trial.

It has also been stated that it is the function or purpose of a bill of particulars to define, clarify, particularize, and limit or circumscribe the issues in the case, to expedite the trial, and assist the court. A general function or purpose of a bill of particulars is to prevent injustice or do justice in the case when that cannot be accomplished without the aid of such a bill.

As articulated in the case of People v.

Enrile gives up at Crame, aide at Sandigan

Hence the courts must exercise careful surveillance to ensure that a defendant is not deprived of this right by an overzealous prosecutor attempting to protect his case or his witnesses. Any effort to leave a defendant in ignorance of the substance of the accusation until the time of trial must be firmly rebuffed. This is especially so where the indictment itself provides a paucity of information. In such cases, the court must be vigilant in safeguarding the defendant's rights to a bill of particulars and to effective discovery.

Should the prosecutor decide to use an indictment which, although technically sufficient, does not adequately allow a defendant to properly prepare for trial, he may well run afoul of the defendant's right to be informed of the accusations against him. Thus, if the Information is lacking, a court should take a liberal attitude towards its granting69 and order the government to file a bill of particulars elaborating on the charges. Notably, the government cannot put the accused in the position of disclosing certain overt acts through the Information and withholding others subsequently discovered, all of which it intends to prove at the trial.

It was highly inappropriate for me to refer to Senator Cayetano simply as 'Alan'," she noted. Saying she does not have an excuse for her unethical behavior, Reyes also admitted of committing "a serious ethical breach" when said she the other senators - including Cayetano - are "hypocrites. She clarified the offensive remark came from her and was not sanctioned by Enrile, explaining Cayetano's remarks were irregular since it was only Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago who returned P, check.

Reyes, who tendered an irrevocable resignation following Enrile and Cayetano's nasty exchange in the plenary hall on Wednesday, is firm she no longer wants to remain as Enrile's staff. I had no right to speak ill of any Senator while I served in the Senate," the lawyer added.

She clarified her resignation is due to "an honest difference of opinion" with Enrile on how to respond to all these mad and baseless accusations of public fund misuse. Reyes explained submitting a detailed response to the allegations about the use of Senate savings to augment senators' Maintenace and Other Operating Expenses MOOE budget, which Enrile refused to deliver as a speech.

He's got too many books and she said it's better that he moved to the place vacated by Jackie so he can have more space. I cannot express it in words. There is a mutual respect," she said. She said she has forgiven him wholeheartedly. Tinga lost but contested the results before the Commission on Elections. JPE tried to persuade her to change her mind to no avail. JPE on Gigi Reyes: I want her back The pork barrel scam later exploded after the elections.

Reyes was among the respondents named in the complaint filed by the justice department before the Office of the Ombudsman on September Tuason unsure Enrile knew of kickbacks Cristina defends JPE While she admitted she has not been involved in her husband's political career — she doesn't even read the newspapers anymore except for the headlines — Cristina defended her husband both from charges he is involved in the pork barrel scam and from allegations he is running a smuggling mafia in Cagayan.

On allegations that he is the mastermind of the pork scam, she said: I don't think that Johhny is that stupid. From the very beginning, he said — I was present in the meeting — he said, 'I don't want to know that anybody tries to smuggle anything, even toothpick.

The P improved as the years went by. Why will you get into a government job that gives you such a low pay?

Controversial Enrile staff speaks, firm on resigning

He junked Marcos to join the People Power Revolution that installed Corazon Aquino as president, but he was later charged with rebellion when he was accused of masterminding the coups against her administration. He would leave Aquino's Cabinet and later win a seat in the Senate. Now 90 years old, JPE has had a long political career. In the eyes of Cristina, JPE is incorruptible. Sometimes he would accept gifts from people whom he has helped. Expensive gifts, yes, but that is about all.