|
maliit na bato
|
Wednesday, March 12, 2003
031203 wed 11:57am
sometime in 2000, authorities raided a shabu-filled condo unit somewhere in metro manila. I may not know the particulars but what I heard in tv patrol was this: this moneyed woman who owned the condo unit was convicted and sentenced reclusion perpetua plus payment of P1M. Her lawyer said the unit was only named after her but was sold a year or so ago. Although it’s still legally hers, the shabu wasn’t and was innocent of it. She was crying violently when the decision was being read. I guess she really couldn’t fight anymore, couldn’t do anything for that matter. She cried she would rather die than be imprisoned. She was crying really hard but the court seemed to hear nothing.
You know the cry of someone whose whole world has just died down on her. The cry when something or someone precious was taken away from you and never can there be a chance of bringing back the past. The cry when you know crying wouldn’t do anything but you, yourself, cannot do anything but cry. When crying seemed to bring an irony of slight comfort and great pain inside you. The kind where you feel it burst up from within like hot lava and yet a big mass of emotions is still trapped inside. Yes, that kind of cry. Not the cutesy kind. I could almost feel that cry from her.
Makes me wonder, what if she was really innocent? If she were guilty, then there won’t be any problem coz she’s been condemned. But what if she’s innocent? What if her only crime was to not concern herself who’s using her condo unit when she sold it? If the biggest mistake she made was not be bothered with the formalities of contract of sale? then not only the law failed to give justice due but also killed someone’s rights too. Not something that would suffice with a sorry card.
Couldn’t help it but somehow I feel sorry for her. Couldn’t help it but wonder what if it happened to me? Or what if it happened to someone I cared for? Mistakes are made everyday, petty or not. what would be the difference if a person committed a big one? If a simple sorry can make up for little mistakes, why can’t a big sorry plus a promise to be careful next time make up for big ones? If stupidity is considered irritating or even amusing at times when it concerns petty slip-ups, then why is it considered a crime for huge errors?
I know, I know there’s wisdom in the law. I know, I know if mistakes are tolerated, everyone would plea stupidity. And I know that the issue is not stupidity, it’s about knowledge of it or consent to it. but what if the real issue the court just overlooked is whether it is ignorance or nesciency? Could the law be wise enough to correct its own? Or could it be sensible enough to say sorry?
posted by anne at 11:59 AM
Sunday, March 09, 2003
030903 sun 8:48am
last day yesterday. nothing special. nothing fancy. i tried but i just couldn't get that feeling. it wasn't like hs or anything close to that. it wasn't even anything at all. i'll miss a few, of course. i'm not totally lifeless, you know. but somehow i'm glad it's over. not that i want to move on. in fact, i want to relive my hs life and the first two years of college. it was a blast. i couldn't get much more popular and i actually enjoyed it. something just went wrong on the third year. wrong class? maybe. now that i think of it, do you know that lawyers speak funny? it's true. they speak weird. that was the trouble when i entered legma. i thought everything was under control, because, afterall, i speak the language. so i'd definitely fit in.
i was wrong. they are a lot weirder. never mind the jargons, every field has their own. but the way they speak it, definitely something else. it made me wonder, maybe i was in the wrong course. i was caught in between speaking and not speaking at all. it was not the practice i'm used to. so when it's my time to get whipped (to recite), i just let it lashed my skin. it was like i couldn't express what i was about to say. sounds stupid, i know. even more stupid when what i wanted to say was a simple:
"wrong place, sir".
because it would have to sound something like:
"the lower court has no jurisdiction over the case at hand since the appelant filed for a yadi yadi yada, hence, the court committed grave abuse of discretion when he estopped the yadi yadi yada again..........."
see, what i mean? maybe not. okay, so it’s just me who couldn’t follow.
couldn't explain it but take my word for it, they speak weird.
|
|
