24 Oras: (Part 3) Paglilinaw ng kampo ni Darryl Yap kaugnay sa utos ng korte; karambola sa EDSA...

[@aronmagbitang6424]

Halatang Natatakot si Direk eh 😂

[@kapitanfrance6373]

DPWH left the group 😂😂

[@kimdaniel7170]

yung wala ka ngang go signal or clearance galing sa mga sotto tapos tinapos nyo pa din yung pagkuha ng pelikula... attorney atanga ka naman na sasabihin mong wala kayong kasalanan dun. Kelan ba naging tama yung pagdungis ng pangalan ng tao na wala naman kayong facts as bases sa scripts niyo.

[@charlitocharlito]

Ano genawa ninyo DPWH

[@teamkabantay9882]

First😂😂

[@ecqcrunchtime2091]

Interviewer/reporter to Vic Sotto's lawyer: "Ano ang fi-nile nating kaso, Attorney?" Vic Sotto's lawyer to the interviewer/reporter: "Nineteen counts po ng Cyber Libel." Interviewer/reporter to Vic Sotto's lawyer: "Bakit po nineteen?" Vic Sotto's lawyer to the interviewer/reporter: "Labing-siyam na beses po na nagpahayag o nag-post ng mapanirang invitation yung respondent, kaya po 19 counts. Bawat post na mapanira ay isang count." Interviewer/reporter to Vic Sotto's lawyer: "Sinu-sino po ang mga ni-re-reklamo o kino-complain?" Vic Sotto's lawyer to the interviewer/reporter: "Dito po sa criminal case, ang finilan lang po natin ay si Mr. Daryl Yap." Interviewer/reporter to Vic Sotto's lawyer: "Nineteen counts of what, Sir?" Vic Sotto's lawyer to the interviewer/reporter: "Cyber libel po. Ang case po natin ay cyber libel. Anyone who cause the publication, so siya po ang sinasabi naming nag-cause ng publication nung mga malicious and defamatory statements." Interviewer/reporter to Vic Sotto's lawyer: "Sir, how about yung mga nag-share na?" Vic Sotto's lawyer to the interviewer/reporter: "Merong hiwalay na kaso para doon. Yun po yung Writ of Habeas data na nauna na naming na-i-file. Hinihintay na lang namin ang utos ng korte kung ito ay kinakatigan o hindi. Pero sa kasong kriminal, ang may kasong kriminal ay si Mr. Daryl Yap." My legal basis: Cyber libel is the act of spreading false information about another person, group, or organization through a computer network. Malice constitutes a libel. The statement was made with the intent to harm or with reckless disregard for the truth. Maliciously false and defamatory statements are false statements made about someone with the intent to harm their reputation. The claimant/plaintiff (Vic Sotto) has the burden of proving the statement depicted in the movie, "The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma" is false. "He who alleges must prove" is a legal principle that states the party, who, in this case, is claiming Php20 million in damages must prove that the allegations about him is false. This is because a mere allegation is not evidence. Legal remedies: 1. Damages: A claimant/plaintiff (Vic Sotto) may be entitled to damages IF he can show that the statements caused them financial loss. 2. Injunctions: A claimant/plaintiff (Vic Sotto) may be entitled to interim or final injunctions. Defenses: 1. Truth: A truthful statement is a complete defense to defamation. 2. Opinion: An unfavorable opinion is NOT defamation.

[@morrisksa]

si vigerlyncare ang madami natulong diyan

[@theathea8112]

Naku patay si fortun ang abogado ni direck . May chance na maabsuwelto 😂

[@JocelynBequilla-d1i]

GOD the FATHER almighty GOD in the highest is the former President Hon. Atty. Fiscal Mayor Rodrigo Roa Duterte makagagahum sa tanan labing gamhanan matuod og buhi nga DIOS AMAHAN the Creator of heaven and earth the Forever the Life the Restorer and the Victory Himself, a man of integrity and a man of valor, the best and perfect President of the Republic of the Philippines, an excellent perfect King of the World.

[@ramilpederio6056]

wala tlagang kwenta mga taga dpwh