Robin Padilla explains search for 'raw file'; ex-justice says online recordings valid

Sen. Robin Padilla – after receiving online criticisms over his search for the "raw file" of the video of Vice President Sara Duterte saying in a Zoom presser that she has contracted someone to kill the President and his family if anything happened to her – said he was referring to the Zoom recording.

In a Facebook post in which he referred to "paid hacks" who were out to confuse the public, Padilla said copies from the live feed over the internet are duplicates that could have been manipulated.

"The host can do a livestream and record it! May built-in Zoom recording. 'Yan ang original copy na tinatawag, na na-record ng kung sinuman ang nagsagawa ng Zoom meeting o interview," Padilla said.

"Lahat ng kumopya diyan sa live feed, maging ano man ’yan galing sa internet, duplicate na ’yan. Anything recorded as a duplicate can be manipulated," he added.

In Sandra Aguinaldo's report on "24 Oras," retired Supreme Court Associate Justice Adolf Azcuna said that recordings of materials available online are admissible as evidence, provided that they have not been tampered with.

“Any recording based on the transmission online would be admissible as long as it is not tampered,” Azcuna said.

“Iba po ang video kaysa sa physical document. Iba ang rules of authenticity, so palagay ko hindi valid ‘yung objection na kailangan ipresenta ang original because every transmission is an original,” he added.

(A video is different from a physical document. The rules of authenticity are different, so I don't think the objection requiring the presentation of the original is valid, because every transmission is an original.)

On the third day of Duterte’s impeachment trial on July 8, the video of Duterte uttering threats against the President, the First Lady, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez was presented.

In the trial, Padilla asked the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Agent who certified the authenticity of the video: “Nakuha niyo po ba yung original? ‘Yung original, hindi po ‘yung galing sa internet.”

(Were you able to get the original? The real original—not the one from the internet.)

NBI Senior Agent John Mark Calilung said he recorded Duterte's Zoom video conference via OBS, a video recording and live streaming software, using a video uploaded by Atty. Harry Roque online.

However, Padilla insisted on asking whether Calilung has acquired an affidavit from a participant of the Zoom conference who directly recorded the meeting.

Calilung answered, “No, sir.”

Padilla’s line of questioning in the trial went viral online, with netizens asking if he really knows legal concepts.

He addressed the issue in a Facebook post, taking a swipe at what he called paid hacks who deliberately mislead the public despite knowing the truth—he did not specify who he was referring to.

The senator said that the press conference held by Duterte via the video conferencing app Zoom was recorded and broadcast live over the internet, adding that the host and other participants in the online conference could have recorded it.

Padilla explained that the copy recorded by those participants is what he considers the "original."

Meanwhile, Roque—after learning that Calilung had sourced the copy from his post—stated on social media that he, alongside Vice President Sara Duterte and others present at the press conference, can vouch for the video's authenticity.

“The statement of Harry Roque is correct… but as I said in the case of digital transmission, the rules are different,” Aczuna said.

“You don't have to present the one who originally recorded it, because the recording is presumed to be the same as the first transmission unless you can show tampering,” he added. –Lyjah Tiffany Bonzo/NB, GMA News