Alright, thank you Karen

*kase sya magbibigay intro senyong lahat*. Wag ka na magintroduce kase ginawa na ni Karen
yon. Bale ganto nlng sabihin mo.

Thank you very much Karen, moving on.. I will be discussing to you the issue of this case. On
the previous report of Miss Farrah Naz she discussed the facts of the case and what really
happened on April 20, 1995 at about 8pm, she even stated that the petitioner who is known
to be Rogelio Pader uttered or to make that clear he screamed unnecessary words against
Atty. Escolango. This occurred on the time where Atty. was conversing with his political
leaders at the terrace of his house. In that, whether the petitioner is guilty of slight or serious
oral defamation.

read the ppt

Simplify..

Sa madaling salita, kung pano natin malalaman kung guilty nga ba yung offender is may guide
tayo tungkol sa kaso, yun ay ang doktrina ng sinaunang kagalang-galang na ang mga
mapanirang salita ay mahuhulog isa o iba pa. Hindi lahat dapat na may kahulugan ito o ang
kanilang nasabi sa kapwa o tinanggap ang karaniwang kahulugan na hinuhusgahan sila nang
hiwalayan. Dapat din na alamin ano ang puno’t dulo ng pangyayari at ugnayan nilang dalawa
na maaaring may posibilidad na patunayan ang intension ng nagkasala na si Rogelio Pader.

Without a doubt, the words uttered by the petitioner were obviously defamatory. However,
the factual backdrop or the background of the story which can be proven true is that the oral
defamation was only slight and that the person who uttered these damaging words was
drunk and obviously this doing wasn’t done intentionally.

In addition to this, we have Karen Magsayo again.. ** sya na magbibigay intro kay Theresa
kase kada ending ng report nyo, si Karen may additional na sasabihin. Hehe ready ka naaaaaa