The taxi driver that 19-year-old Carl Angelo Arnaiz supposedly robbed on August 18 was asked to issue two affidavits by Caloocan City police.
The Philippine Daily Inquirer tweeted a collaged photos of the two affidavits, showing what the taxi driver Tomas Bagcal could recall about the robbery.
[ads2]
It was noticeable, though, how different some of the details of the affidavits were. The Inquirer reported that Bagcal issued the first affidavit on August 18, immediately after the incident occurred. The second one was issued on August 29, a day after Carl’s mother, Eva Arnaiz, identified his body.
The contradictions in the affidavits included the following:
- Two different locations, different time
In the first affidavit, Bagcal testified that Carl declared holdup when they were approaching the barangay hall of Barangay 28 at around 3am.
In the second one, the taxi driver said that the holdup happened along C-3 road at about 3:20am.
- No description of the robber, then a clear description that matched what Carl wore
In the first affidavit, the driver could not provide a description of the robber after he was asked if he could identify the suspect.
But in the second affidavit, which happened 10 days after the crime was committed, the taxi driver was quite specific in describing the robber.
[ads1]
Bautista: “Nakilala mo ba kung sino ang nangholdup sayo?”
Bagcal: “Hindi po, namukaan ko lang po siya, noong mga panahong iyon, naka itim na sweat shirt na may hood, itim na sombrero, blue na maong short pants, naka tsinelas at may dalang bag.”
- Number of suspects
In the first affidavit, Bagcal said “mga suspect,” but he said “only one suspect” in his second affidavit.
- Part of the taxi driver’s body that was hit
In his first affidavit, Bagcal said the robber hit him in the arm. In the second one, he attested that he was hit in the hand.
- His participation in chasing the suspect
In both affidavits, Bagcal described staying 150 meters away from the place where the cops allegedly shoot it out with Carl.
But in his second affidavit, the taxi driver detailed his location during the shootout, saying that he was hiding behind an electric post. When the exchange of fire ended, the cops called him over to show him the suspect’s body.
Bagcal also described that he joined the chase after the suspect.
In Rappler’s report, National Capital Region Police Office Director Oscar Albayalde said that adding statements to a previous affidavit is “regular.”
“Puwede kung meron siyang gustong idagdag, kung binago niya, merong konting dinagdag siya, puwede iyan, parang sa korte puwedeng idagdag,” Albayalde told Rappler in a phone interview.
However, Albayalde noted that it was irregular for the taxi driver to forget what the robber looked like only to describe what Carl wore in full in his second affidavit.
“Puwede bang malimutan ang sinasabi niya, nahold-up siya?” Albayalde said. “”Kung gano’n, kailangang iimbestiga rin ‘yung taxi driver kung talagang ano, puwede bang wala siyang natandaan. Mangyari ba naman hindi mo naman puwedeng makalimutan agad-agad.”
Sources: ( inquirer.net , rappler.com )
[ads3]
