My first impression of Fariñas is of doubt, that is, he didn’t look particularly intelligent, his hair was dyed brown in a way that I’ve never seen any male public official has and all I knew about him was that he had a wife who committed suicide.
But the first time I heard him speak in an interview in ANC on why he joined the prosecution team after their impeachment complaint filing, despite his non-signing of the complaint itself, I had thought he was fairly capable. I was actually disappointed that he wasn’t utilized in the trial that is, his article (I think it was article 6) was not brought out.
A friend of mine recently commented that she didn’t think this Fariñas character looked credible or capable while we were watching the impeachment coverage, due to the same reasons that I had. And, I told her that she would be surprised that he's actually pretty good and that I've seen him in several interviews where he did fairly well.
And, hey, I was proven right when Fariñas did a portion of the prosecution’s closing argument last Monday. Tupas’ performance was just "so, so". Sonny Belmonte’s was honorary but was a bore. Fariñas' was really on the mark. The whole “palusot” theme was brilliant, including the accompanying data on the FX rate at the time when Corona claimed he started saving in 1968 - that was great too. Fariñas' closing argument encapsulated the prosecution’s points and poked holes in all of Corona’s statements at the same time. Add to that he communicated it to the public extremely well.
For me it is a major plus point that he spoke in a normal sounding and very comfortable Tagalog. I told my friend that see, this is a Tagalog statement that is not awkward and not the least bit annoying because it is clear that he normally speaks in Tagalog. He is comfortable with the language. Again, I say, a really small feat to ask seeing as we are all Filipinos and we should really all be comfortable using the national language.
Meanwhile, the defense really just sounded lack lustered and boring. Yes, they may be talking about this or that law technicality, which might have some valid points somewhere there, however they still sounded boring. They probably didn’t get any plus points from the public opinion meter there as most probably wouldn't be able to grasp or care about half of what they were saying.
Cuevas has proven that he’s a very brilliant lawyer but I suppose he has his limits. What can he really do when faced with that much of an overwhelmingly bad situation? He really has no other way that to go with the technicalities, what else does he really have then?
No comments:
Post a Comment