The record testified in at the Regional Trial Court here by BI representative Angelito Lopez showed Sergio went abroad at least 19 times before April 21, 2010 or before she flew with Ve-loso to Kuala Lumpur.
It was in Malaysia where a certain Ike, allegedly a friend of Sergio, handed over to Veloso a travel bag that contained 2.6 kilos of heroin. Veloso was arrested in Yo-gkarta airport in Indonesia on April 25, 2010.
The travel history presented by Lopez before the sala of Judge Anerica Castillo-Reyes, however, did not carry details where Sergio went in those occasions.
Lopez was presented by the prosecution as witness against Sergio, her partner Julius La-canilao and a certain Ike for the charges of qualified human trafficking in person, Illegal recruit-ment and estafa/swindling filed by Veloso through her representatives.
Lawyer Edre Olalia, president of the National Union of People’s Lawyers, said the frequent foreign trips made by Sergio disproved her claim of being an indigent, thus represented by the public attorney’s office (PAO) headed by lawyer Persida Acosta.
“Kind of frequent flyer for someone who claims to be indigent and purportedly cannot af-ford the services of private coun-sel. It’s a ruse to suit her contrived defense,” Olalia said.
Atty. Ephraim Cortez, NUPL secretary general, who now appears before the court, said the frequency of travel also showed that Sergio had several contacts overseas. “This supports the allegations that she was a recruiter,” Cortez said.
During the hearing, the de-fense insisted that the travel history of Sergio was irrelevant. The court ruled in favor of its presenta-tion though.
In a statement the NUPL said that after Lopez, Veloso is now “the only remaining material witness.”
The court affirmed the taking of Veloso’s deposition. But the defense has a pending motion to defer the filling of their comment on the written interrogatories submitted by the prosecution as it ex-pressed intention to file a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals.
This petition for certiorari would determine whether or not the judge acted without jurisdic-tion and/or with grave abuse of discretion when she ordered the order.
