Contrary to what the other people claim, Janet Napoles presence in the Senate hearing is not a futile exercise. It is insightful and a spectacle.
Ms. Janet Napoles’ demeanor defines the Senate hearing. Its impact felt by many. The million TV viewers get their blood veins surged in anger. If only the TV viewers could make their eyes as needles pricking the face of Napoles because of wrath, Napoles’ face would have become the doll of a furious witch. If only Ms. Janet Napoles’ demeanor is the sole basis of her guilt, she is guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
When Sen. Miriam Santiago turns came to question Napoles, she narrated about her experience as a Trial Court Judge. The feisty Senator said, she knew right away if the person charge in court is guilty or not by the person’s demeanor. Throughout the proceedings, Napoles had been evasive, selective, and furtive of the questions asked, though her answers are just the varieties of “I don’t know,” or invoking her right of self-incrimination.
The chair of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, Sen. Teofisto Guingona contrasted Ms. Napoles demeanor to that of the whistle blowers. Napoles is bored seemed fed up listening to the whistle blowers as if their statements convict her. Napoles seemed distracted. Her eyes darted not on anything or anyone in particular. She twitched her body on her seat wishing the day would be over. The whistle blowers on the other hand, are assertive; very detailed of the facts they were saying, relaxed, and without guilt.
On Sen. Grace Poe’s turns, the senator made a telling observation of Ms. Napoles’ demeanor. Sen. Poe noticed the vast departure of Ms. Napoles to her usual, “I don’t know” or “I invoke…” replies. When Sen. Santiago asked Ms. Napoles, If she has something to do with the PR man who had been scouting “AC-DC”, journalists to discredit the image of the DAP (Disbursement Acceleration Project). Sen. Grace Poe saw Ms. Napoles’ immediate irked denial. To Sen. Grace Poe, that demeanor is an indication of truthfulness, whereas on Ms. Napoles’ reply to questions about the PDAF, her demeanor showed untruthfulness
The beauty of the Senate hearing hinges on three valuable insights provided by Sen. Miriam Santiago. 1) That a certain Jimmy Policarpio, a PR man had been buying the services of the cheap journalists in town to bring the DAP into a bad light. 2) That there is a strong possibility that Ms. Napoles could not be the most the guilty after all; therefore, she could turn herself into a state witness. (While Sen. Santiago explained this, Ms. Napoles nodded her head, as if in agreement. Her left eyebrows arched a bit. Moreover, she had that intense look for the senator, as if seriously filtering her thoughts. And 3) Sen. Santiago offered the most valuable advice Ms. Napoles could ever have: “Be a snitch! Be safe! Do her perpetuable testimonies before it’s too late,” as her co-accused – counseled the senator – has a mighty empire and could get her killed.
The Senate hearing is not a futile exercise after all.