On the fifth day of the impeachment trial on Tuesday, July 14, 2026, Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense team argued that her statement about having reportedly spoken to someone to kill President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr. and his family - should she be killed - was made in response to a question and not a threat.

According to defense lawyer Mark Vinluan, the Vice President’s remarks during the late-night online media briefing in November 2024 were simply responses to questions raised during the event.

“It is our position that the statements made by the Vice President were not threats in the first place. That’s why we were categorizing it as a mere response to a question and answer,” Vinluan said.

“It was never aimed directly at the President, First Lady, and the former Speaker. In other words, had they not watched the video, they wouldn't have known about it. In other words, your Honor, there was no threats to begin with and even the discussion on the elements is not applicable insofar as determining the innocence or guilt of the Vice President,” he added.

Duterte also issued a statement on July 14, saying Day 4 of the impeachment trial showed the complaint against her lacks evidence.

“On Day 4 of the impeachment trial, the country witnessed what I have been saying all along: the complaint is not supported by evidence,” Duterte said.

Day 4 of the trial focused on the alleged threats she made against Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former Speaker Martin Romualdez—that she had spoken to someone who could kill them in the event that she were killed.

“Repeatedly claiming that there were threats when none existed, inventing an assassin where there was none, and fabricating evidence to support those claims does not transform fiction into fact,” Duterte said.

CROSS-EXAMINATION

During the continuation of the cross-examination, Vinluan asked the second prosecution witness, Atty. Jeremey Lotoc, whether grave threats and inciting to sedition are considered felonies and that whether the charges constitute impeachable offenses.

Lotoc said determining whether the alleged acts qualify as betrayal of public trust and impeachable offenses falls under the discretion of the senator-judges.

“If you mean impeachable offenses, whether or not magka-qualify ba siya as betrayal of public trust, it’s the appreciation of the judges, your Honor. Wala po sa amin,” Lotoc said.

Lotoc served previously as chief of the cybercrime division of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), which investigated the alleged threat at that time, before he was appointed as director of NBI-Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.

WITNESSES DROPPED

Meanwhile, the prosecution panel announced that it will no longer present Office of the Vice President (OVP) chief of staff Zuleika Lopez and House of Representatives security official Captain Belinda Bello who were supposed to take the witness stand on Tuesday and Wednesday, respectively.

Private Prosecutor Lorna Kapunan said the prosecution had intended to question Lopez about the authenticity of the video of the online press conference.

However, she said the defense’s use of the same footage amounted to an admission of its authenticity.

"It is the wisdom of the public prosecutors as expressed by this representation that we find it totally unnecessary, redundant, and a surplusage to still present Atty. Zuleika Lopez as well as Capt. Belinda Bello,” Kapunan said.

“I have said, on behalf of the public prosecutors, that we will no longer be presenting Atty. Zuleika Lopez and, in addition, because the testimony of Captain Belinda Bello is merely corroborative," she added.