I agree. Kaya maraming nagdodoubt sa kanya eh. Sana justice will be served and not served only to those who have better influence. Kung totoo yung sinasabi nia, his father doesn't need to go to Senator friends.
Nakakalimutan nia yata na accuser and accused both have rights.
Ang mga tao maskampi sa mga demonyo kesa sa taong naabuso.Mga wala ba kayong moral. Hindi dapat pinalalagpas ang may sala. Dapat makasuhan kawawa na ung mahihirap na hindi makuha ang justice.
The case of Sandro vs. Nones and Cruz is a completely different case from that of Rita Daniela. Lawyers are representing their clients whether they are the plaintiff or the defendant. I don’t understand why Sandro Muhlach is taking it out on the lawyer doing her job. Ibig ho bang sabihin dapat yung mga accused lang ang dapat kuning client ni lawyer?
You know it makes sense cause you have moral obligation as a lawyer, you cant defend someone if ur not confident they are 100% telling the truth. I would understand if as a lawyer shes there to lighten the sentence but she is saying her clients are completely immocent. For real, dun plang sa text it doesnt seem na may magandang intention!
i think ang minimean niya is yung statement nung atty. nung sa PEP, then yung statement niya ngayon sa bago niyang case. taliwas kasi. dun sa una sabi niya walang basis yung mga sinabi ni sandro, so parang siya yung nagvictime blame, then ngayon sa case ni rita sabi niya wag magvictim blame hahaha
Actually, naisip ko nga na may isa pang SA case na hawak si madam, pero akala ko victim din ang other client ni Atty. Ang weird nga na tinanggap nya both cases pero she's on opposite sides.
It’s not weird. Lawyer sya, trabaho nila yan. May karapatan din naman ang mga accused kahit na maprove na guilty sila. In case di ka aware, it’s a lawyer’s job to ensure that yun rights nila ay naoobserve pa rin in accordance with the law. It’s not just about winning a case.
mahirap man sikmurain at times, everyone has rights, even those guilty of crimes. Trabaho nya yan as a lawyer, making sure na protected and enforced pa rin ang rights ng mga tao, whether ang client nya ay victim or suspect.
Akala niya porket lawyer ng kabila eh kalaban na din niya. Hindi niya naintindihan ang mga lawyers nga minsan kahit opposing counsels after hearings eh nagbibiruan pa din ang mga yan. It’s all just part of work.
I hope Sandro won't create a space so that the lawyer will be bashed and publicly humiliated. She was just doing her job and probably made the statement early on in the case.
I don’t think Sandro is in the right here and it goes to show how young and immature he still is. Trabaho naman yan talaga ng abogado to represent clients. It’s not personal. Saka both cases have nothing to do with each other so no conflict of interest there.
Hayaan mo na yung lawyer Sandro. Trabaho nila yan at sinumpaan nila yan. Hindi sila pwede tumanggi kung may gusto magpatulong sa kanila. Trabaho yan. Kahit sabihin mukha silang pera lahat naman tayo kumakayod para jan.
Hay naku sandro. Attorneys are ALLOWED to represent whoever they want to as long as there's no conflict of interest within the case. Your case and rita's case are not related therefore she's allowed to represent both. Attorneys are not representing based on their opinion but based on FACTS. So just get your facts straight and prove them wrong.
Isipin mo nalang din Sandro, kahit ang mga kriminal, masasamang tao nililigtas at ginagamot pa din ng mga doktor. Kahit kaaway pa nila. Kasi tungkulin nila iligtas ang buhay ng tao.
Wag ka muna magsoc med baka mapagalitan ka pa ng judge kapag nag-iminanifest yang post mo sa court. You're attacking the professionalism of lawyers. Nasa Code of Professional Responsibility at Accountability nila yan to represent anyone accused man o complainant.
Alam mo Sandro, tumahimik ka na lng kaya, mahaba haba pang lalakarin ng kaso mo.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Kaya maraming nagdodoubt sa kanya eh. Sana justice will be served and not served only to those who have better influence. Kung totoo yung sinasabi nia, his father doesn't need to go to Senator friends.
DeleteNakakalimutan nia yata na accuser and accused both have rights.
Ikaw manahimik. May point siya.
Deletewalang nag dodoubt sa kanya, ikaw lang teh at ang PR team niyong bulok
Delete12:57 ikaw ang manahimik legally speaking may rights ang accused, what happened sa innocent until proven guilty?
Delete2:25 actually marami din
Delete1214 marami naman talagang tao na hindi nagiisip.
DeleteIsnt she the lawyer of Vhong?
DeleteAng mga tao maskampi sa mga demonyo kesa sa taong naabuso.Mga wala ba kayong moral. Hindi dapat pinalalagpas ang may sala. Dapat makasuhan kawawa na ung mahihirap na hindi makuha ang justice.
DeleteSa mga taong nang-aabuso sa ibang tao sana magkasakit sila ng malala dahil makasalanan sila.
DeleteThe case of Sandro vs. Nones and Cruz is a completely different case from that of Rita Daniela. Lawyers are representing their clients whether they are the plaintiff or the defendant. I don’t understand why Sandro Muhlach is taking it out on the lawyer doing her job. Ibig ho bang sabihin dapat yung mga accused lang ang dapat kuning client ni lawyer?
ReplyDeleteOo nga.
DeleteAgree
DeleteBlame it on his youth, bata pa siya kaya hindi niya alam yang mga bagay na yan na lawyers are simply doing their job.
DeleteKaya eh, walang sense na common din. Una dakdak.
Deletelawyers will defend any type of case
DeleteYou know it makes sense cause you have moral obligation as a lawyer, you cant defend someone if ur not confident they are 100% telling the truth. I would understand if as a lawyer shes there to lighten the sentence but she is saying her clients are completely immocent. For real, dun plang sa text it doesnt seem na may magandang intention!
Deletei think ang minimean niya is yung statement nung atty. nung sa PEP, then yung statement niya ngayon sa bago niyang case. taliwas kasi. dun sa una sabi niya walang basis yung mga sinabi ni sandro, so parang siya yung nagvictime blame, then ngayon sa case ni rita sabi niya wag magvictim blame hahaha
DeleteActually, naisip ko nga na may isa pang SA case na hawak si madam, pero akala ko victim din ang other client ni Atty. Ang weird nga na tinanggap nya both cases pero she's on opposite sides.
ReplyDeleteIt’s not weird. Lawyer sya, trabaho nila yan. May karapatan din naman ang mga accused kahit na maprove na guilty sila. In case di ka aware, it’s a lawyer’s job to ensure that yun rights nila ay naoobserve pa rin in accordance with the law. It’s not just about winning a case.
DeleteYes 10:27. Minsan nga they’re just there to bargain the most appropriate deal for their clients.
Delete10:27 It's also all about the money, if I may add
DeleteHindi weird yun isa ka pa! Lawyers yan teh!! I alamg personalan tang na loob.
DeleteLawyers as any other professionals should always be objective.
Deletetruth be told, pera pera syempre. Lawyer yan. Wala naman siyang advocacy to side in just one particular case.
Deletemahirap man sikmurain at times, everyone has rights, even those guilty of crimes. Trabaho nya yan as a lawyer, making sure na protected and enforced pa rin ang rights ng mga tao, whether ang client nya ay victim or suspect.
ReplyDeleteAkala niya porket lawyer ng kabila eh kalaban na din niya. Hindi niya naintindihan ang mga lawyers nga minsan kahit opposing counsels after hearings eh nagbibiruan pa din ang mga yan. It’s all just part of work.
DeleteI hope Sandro won't create a space so that the lawyer will be bashed and publicly humiliated. She was just doing her job and probably made the statement early on in the case.
ReplyDeletepero pangit naman din makita na doble kara ang lawyer.
DeleteI don’t think Sandro is in the right here and it goes to show how young and immature he still is. Trabaho naman yan talaga ng abogado to represent clients. It’s not personal. Saka both cases have nothing to do with each other so no conflict of interest there.
ReplyDeleteHayaan mo na yung lawyer Sandro. Trabaho nila yan at sinumpaan nila yan. Hindi sila pwede tumanggi kung may gusto magpatulong sa kanila. Trabaho yan. Kahit sabihin mukha silang pera lahat naman tayo kumakayod para jan.
ReplyDeleteconcentrate na laang kayo sa mga matibay ninyong ebidensya at siguraduhin na magaling at de kampanilya ang lawyer ninyong lalaban dyan
Delete4:41 dapat mag concentrate din si Sandro since wala naman siyang malakas na ebidensya laban din dun sa dalawa.
DeleteSo yong mga accused bawal ng mag abogado? Eh di ipakulong na direcho? Anong logic meron itong si Sandro?
ReplyDeleteBata, ang kalaban mo yung dalawa lang ha, wag mo personalin pati attorneys nila because they’re just doing their job. Konting 🧠naman please.
ReplyDeleteLawyer has the right to represent whether her client is the victim or suspect.
ReplyDeleteHay naku sandro. Attorneys are ALLOWED to represent whoever they want to as long as there's no conflict of interest within the case. Your case and rita's case are not related therefore she's allowed to represent both. Attorneys are not representing based on their opinion but based on FACTS. So just get your facts straight and prove them wrong.
ReplyDeleteCorrect.
Deleteshe can yes. kaya sabi ni sandro, IRONIC, which is true. ironic talaga
DeleteIsipin mo nalang din Sandro, kahit ang mga kriminal, masasamang tao nililigtas at ginagamot pa din ng mga doktor. Kahit kaaway pa nila. Kasi tungkulin nila iligtas ang buhay ng tao.
ReplyDeleteMay kaiba dito sa batang eto. Basta may off sa kanya.
ReplyDeleteWala atang nag gguide kay sandro. Parang paliguy ligoy sya sa mga posts kahit sa pagdalo nya sa senate hearing which is mali din.
ReplyDeleteDapat kung depressed sya hindi muna sya payagan muna mag social media.
ReplyDelete10:06 nag ttv guesting na nga.
DeleteWag ka muna magsoc med baka mapagalitan ka pa ng judge kapag nag-iminanifest yang post mo sa court. You're attacking the professionalism of lawyers. Nasa Code of Professional Responsibility at Accountability nila yan to represent anyone accused man o complainant.
ReplyDeleteI hope his lawyer advises him on that.
DeleteTrue. Sana may nagaadvise kay Sandro
Delete