Weird, this ruling of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 159 of Judge Rodolfo Bonifacio. The question before him is this--was the sex video illegally obtained, and therefore, punishable under our laws?
Bonifacio ruled that Katrina Halili, the plaintiff in this sex video scandal case, knew that she was being videotaped by Hayden Kho, and therefore, that sex video was legal and therefore, cannot be a subject of a complaint or a case.
When Bonifacio gave that erroneous and stupid decision, Halili was distraught while Kho was all in tears. Probably, in the mind of self-confessed sex maniac Kho, Bonifacio's decision gave him full license to do another sex video.
Bonifacio is an idiot. Mas marunong pa siya sa complainant na paulit-ulit na sinabing hindi niya alam na siya ay kinukunan ng malalaswa nitong si Hayden Kho.
Was Bonifacio there during the commission of the offense? No, he was not. Where did he get that impression or conclusion that Halili knew that she was being videotaped? Bonifacio insists that Halili knew because the alleged video camera was just five feet away from her. What?
So, what Bonifacio is saying that it is legal for someone to take a video shot of another provided that they knew they were videotaped? What if the victim really knew that there was a camera but the victim resisted all throughout the video taping session? Is that still legal?
What the law is punishing is the production of any material without the consent of the alleged victim. The only proof
Besides, a video camera may be five feet away from you, but if you're not informed that this video camera is on, you can't really know if it's "live" or "not", especially since the room was dark at that time.
Halili should file an appeal.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you very much for reading my blog. You inspired me. But if you intend to put your name "anonymous", better not comment at all. Thanks!