Who is the killer?

Idon’t personally know Aireen Adolfo, the call center agent and model whose body was found in a grassy area in Sitio Dita, Barangay Pulangbato last week, her face smashed with a rock. But I am one with those demanding justice for her death.

Adolfo, 24, was last seen boarding a motorcycle-for-hire or habal-habal from their house to Talamban proper in the evening of July 9 to withdraw money from her ATM account and buy food. The following day, her body was found in a secluded place in a subdivision development in Pulangbato.

A few days after, the police invited for questioning two habal-habal drivers whom they considered as persons of interest. They were Sherwin Velasquez and Ramonito Tribunalo, who was later released for lack of evidence.

Velasquez, who is a relative of the victim, is still in detention following the confiscation of illegal drugs from his possession when he was “arrested.” The police now consider him the “primary suspect” but no case has been filed and no witness has surfaced.

Velasquez was tagged as a suspect because of the “dead cock” or “bihag” found in the site and believed to have been brought by him from a cockfight.

But the other day, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) 7 pulled a surprise by presenting another suspect. Arrested was another habal-habal driver, Francisco Capalaran,47.

The NBI claimed they have a witness to prove that Capalaran was the driver of the motorcycle whom the victim boarded on that fateful evening. The witness, a woman, was presented by the NBI during a press conference. She described the clothes worn by Capalaran and Adolfo when they were last seen. But she did not see the killing.

The witness also claimed that she and Capalaran are friends but after Adolfo was killed, the driver’s attitude toward her changed. When Capalaran was examined, he had bruises in the back, a sign that someone attempted to fight him back. There was also a bloodstain in his jacket.

One crime with two different persons tagged as suspects? Who is the real killer? Weighing the two different theories, I am inclined to believe in the NBI because its investigator was able to present a witness even though she did not see the killing. All the others are circumstantial evidence or evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion.

Circumstantial evidence is generally admissible in court unless the connection between the fact and the inference is too weak to be of help in deciding the case. Would the police insist on their own finding that Velasquez is the primary suspect and charge him before the prosecutor’s office? Or would they be forced to release him in view of the NBI’s findings?

Kinahanglan klarohon ni sa NBI ug police kay malawgaw unya ning kasoha. Mag- coordinate sila. Asa may bug-at nga ebidensya kanang buhi nga witness apan wala makakita sa pagpatay o kanang gilabay nga bihag? Pagkatoytoy.