Justice department OKs examination of Ruby Rose’s clothes

MANILA, Philippines - The Department of Justice agreed Monday to a physical examination of the articles of clothing and other physical evidence collated by the Philippine National Police Crime Laboratory to determine whether the woman found inside a cemented steel box was indeed Ruby Rose Barrameda. At the continuation of the preliminary investigation on the murder charges filed by the family of Barrameda against her estranged husband and his father and uncle, defense lawyers insisted that there persists a doubt as to whether it was indeed Ruby Rose’s body. Lawyer Mario Aguinaldo, counsel for respondents Manuel Jimenez III, Barrameda’s husband, his father Manuel II, and uncle Lope, wanted to inspect the personal effects retrieved from the body of a dead woman that was recovered by police at the bottom of the Manila Bay last June 10. The body was recovered through a tip from suspect turned-state witness Manuel Montero. In seeking another forensic examination, Aguinaldo argued that there was no conclusive proof that the victim recovered near the property of Buena Suerte Jimenez Fishing and Trading Corp. was Ruby Rose since the body was not properly identified. “The burden of proof that the body was Ruby Rose is with the complainant, but just the same, we are asking that the pieces of physical evidence at the time of the recovery of the body be produced, in the interest of justice," he said. He further pointed out that Manuel III still believes that his estranged wife is still alive, thus, raising the possibility that the body recovered and buried by the Barrameda family did not belong to Ruby Rose. The lawyer noted that the size of the Lacoste shirt worn by the recovered dead female was size 38 and would fit only a petite woman, while Ruby Rose was considered a tall woman. He also cited a hole in the chest of the woman found in Manila Bay since Ruby Rose was not shot and was only strangled to death based on the testimony of Montero. Aguinaldo also questioned why hemorrhages and fractured ribs in the woman’s body were not mentioned in the death certificate submitted with the complaint. Women’s rights lawyer Rowena Guanzon, counsel for the complainant, initially opposed the examination of the pieces of evidence and wanted the case to be submitted for resolution already. She argued that a court order might be necessary for the inspection of evidence. However, the probe panel overruled her objection. Apart from the three Jimenezes, the four other respondents in the murder case - Eric Fernandez, Spyke Discalzo, Roberto Ponce and Rudy de la Cruz – also submitted their counter affidavits and denied the allegation of Montero. In his affidavit, Montero confessed he was one of the five killers who were allegedly paid with P50,000 each to carry out the murder two years ago. He had directly named Ruby Rose’s father-in-law and his brother as the ones who ordered him and four others to abduct and kill her. He also alleged that the victim’s husband also had knowledge of the killing. - GMANews.TV