I wonder, if the dogs, by any curious twist of nature learned to hide from view when copulating and not just anywhere around the corner, if they will develop to be peeping toms too like us?

—–

The whole affair might center on a stolen private video disseminated on the internet and distributed in optical disks causing psychological violence on the part of the woman-complainant…

(a) Stolen private video – The man alleges it was a private sex video albeit a non-consensual video recording. It was a consensual sexual encounter done in private and may pass to some as non-obscene in nature. The non-consensual video recording, although widely perceived to be wrong (or an act by one who is sick or a pervert), may not be a crime.

(b) Internet uploading – This borders on “indecent publication of pornographic materials” (as mentioned by the NBI). Is there a law against uploading a non-obscene material? Or if the material is considered pornographic, is there a law against uploading it to the internet? Anti-piracy law maybe? A wise guy commented that the video is actually a copyrighted material – he said, “what better way to copyright a personal video than by starring in it.”

(c) Optical disk creation and distribution – Obviously, this is for profit. This borders on “indecent publication of pornographic materials.” This could be covered by our Revised Penal Code…

Revised Penal Code
Title Six
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS
Chapter Two
OFFENSES AGAINST DECENCY AND GOOD CUSTOMS

“Art. 201. Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions and indecent shows. — The penalty of prision mayor or a fine ranging from six thousand to twelve thousand pesos, or both such imprisonment and fine, shall be imposed upon:

(3) Those who shall sell, give away or exhibit films, prints, engravings, sculpture or literature which are offensive to morals.”

…However, there was no mention of “optical disk.” Besides, proper definition of obscenity and indecency should be in order.

(d) Psychological violence – The man alleges he was also a victim and all he did was record a video, although non-consensual as alleged by the victim. The video was supposed to be a private or personal one. As drawn together from the statements of the man’s lawyer, how could he have caused substantial emotional or psychological distress and public humiliation on the victim when he himself is a victim? Remember the ‘bonsai” and “the not-so-dangerous weapon?” It’s possible there is now mental or emotional anguish on the man and he is also at present publicly ridiculed and humiliated. His privacy was also violated when his private property was stolen.

(Now, come to think of it, how will they appreciate the admissibility of evidence if only a copy of the stolen private video can be produced? How will the maker of the video tell if the video that will be produced in court is the original digital recording – the author, date and time stamps in “Properties” possibly? Well, that’s probably the case why the Anti-Fraud and Computer Crimes Division of the NBI is handling the case. The OMB would also come in handy in investigating the copyrighted material.)

The one who mainly caused psychological violence to the victim is the one who made the video public. True? Abangan…

Again, here’s hoping the lawmakers will continue their keen interest on the case.

If you ask nicely, like the other guys here, you might get your wiah. hehehe

http://pipitblog.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/dr-hayden-kho-katrina-halili-maricar-reyes-and-brazilian-model-sex-scandals-full-versions/

You beat me to it. This is exactly the comment that I wanted to write here after watching the Hayden/Katrina video last night.

Ramrod, only the Maricar Reyes is a national catastrophe.

In terms of watershed appointments in the Supreme Court, nothing beats the watch of Cory Aquino. She approximated the standard of excellence observed by her predecessors from MLQ, Sergio Osmena, down to FM. Imagine a Supreme Court without a Jose P. Laurel or a Jose Bambino Luis Reyes. JBL went to the HIgh Court with the singular appointment from a man named Diosdado, which literally means “kaloob ng Maykapal.”

KEEPING THE SCORE

The appointee in the High Court has a score card. He knows the number of cases he has so far gifted the benefactor to humour him. The appointee has a false notion as well on the level of patriotism of the patron. The Justice thinks that any favourable decision, whether on the majority or the minority, counts. What the patron hates is when the beneficiary begins tinkering with his own brain.

Appointment to the High Court is irrevocable. They leave the Court at age 70. Or only Congress can fire them thru impeachment. Unlike the coterminous alter egos, they are sustained by the pleasure of the appointing power.

The privilege of tenure security is not lost on the appointee. With this blank check, ingratitude is not far behind.

The appointing power therefore looks for an underling, an intellectual lightweight, to do his biddings all thru out his incumbency in the High Tribunal.

RETIREMENT COLLATERAL

GMA does a George W. Bush when the US President appointed the 50-year old conservative outsider John Roberts, Jr. as Supreme Court Chief Justice. As there is no age retirement in the US Judiciary, its Justices serve during good behaviour, meaning they essentially serve for life and can be removed only by resignation, or by impeachment and subsequent conviction. Roberts expects to outlast, in all probability, most of the incumbents. Not a whimper was heard from the sitting magistrates. With the Senate as confirming body, the crevices of Roberts persona were already passed upon.

For the first time in our history, and probably in any legal order, the High Tribunal reviews the qualification of a colleague freshly designated by the Executive.

Where the appointment is struck down as unconstitutional and therefore grave abuse of discretion, the sitting President earns the repute of mangling a coordinate hallowed institution.

Incidentally, Ong’s appointment was handed by a little wisp named Gloria, a curious word in the immortal phrase, Sic Transit Gloria Mundi.