Call me bubba Posted December 6, 2012 Posted December 6, 2012 thank you again for the updates on how this is unfolding. it is so sad that a crime has occurred and the "powers to be" are still doing an investigation. please keep the Forum updated as progress occurs, just curious, :89: would a video tape of a persons testimony be allowed if he/she is not able to be present or is dead? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesmusslewhite Posted December 6, 2012 Author Posted December 6, 2012 thank you again for the updates on how this is unfolding. it is so sad that a crime has occurred and the "powers to be" are still doing an investigation. please keep the Forum updated as progress occurs, just curious, :89: would a video tape of a persons testimony be allowed if he/she is not able to be present or is dead? To tell you the truth I do not know. It seems that a written statement holds little weight if the person making the statement is killed. In fact often a case is dismissed once the only withness is dead. If there are still other witness statements and the video tape is in support than perhaps it would still be used. Tricky question. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve & Myrlita Posted December 6, 2012 Posted December 6, 2012 To tell you the truth I do not know. It seems that a written statement holds little weight if the person making the statement is killed. In fact often a case is dismissed once the only withness is dead. If there are still other witness statements and the video tape is in support than perhaps it would still be used. Tricky question. More likely than not the statement or video might get tossed due to the defendant's right to cross examine the witness. Can't C-E a witness if they're dead. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesmusslewhite Posted December 8, 2012 Author Posted December 8, 2012 (edited) I received a text from investigator Miole who is one of the chief investigators of the Harry Doyle murder case. An arrest warrant has been filed against Jerome Devocion on the charge of Arson. I believe it is the same arson case filled by Harry Doyle’s former secretary Miss. Kima. Last New Years at around 3am gasoline was poured around the home of Miss. Kima as she and six other family members were asleep, luckily for them and their neighbors it had been a heavy downpour that evening. The over saturated wood burned extra slowly allowing Miss Kima and her family to barely escape the flames with their lives. Arson is a non-bailable crime. Jerome Devocion filed paperwork on October 30th with the prosecutor to reopen the case and to bring charges of Perjury and Deformation of Character against the police investigators and witnesses in the Harry Doyle murder case. I was served a subpoena to appear on the 12th and 18th of this month to face these allegations. I do not know if Jerome will be appearing as he will be handcuffed on the spot, nor do I know how this will affect his claim. Should be quite interesting this coming Wednesday to say the least Edited December 8, 2012 by jamesmusslewhite 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyAway Posted December 8, 2012 Posted December 8, 2012 To tell you the truth I do not know. It seems that a written statement holds little weight if the person making the statement is killed. In fact often a case is dismissed once the only withness is dead. If there are still other witness statements and the video tape is in support than perhaps it would still be used. Tricky question. More likely than not the statement or video might get tossed due to the defendant's right to cross examine the witness. Can't C-E a witness if they're dead. How about a sort deposition of the witness? Both sides are present. In US courts there is no "Perry Mason" type surprises with evidence. Attorney's/Lawyer's know not to ask a question they do not already know the answer to. Well, most of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesmusslewhite Posted December 19, 2012 Author Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) :unsure: You know James, I have been Following this story, since you first started it. I know, I am guilty of some lighthearted humour in my postings BUT it is now, beyond belief, what is being unearthed It surely is Spiraling and I hope, not out of control, the OJ Simpson trial comes to mind. I was talking to a Lawyer here Yesterday, I mentioned the case to him and asked about perjury. His Comment was short and simple. ANYONE TELLING A LIE UNDER OATH. his view is, it is as simple as that. No need for the courts mumbo jumbo, if you tell a Lie under oath you are guilty of perjury, BUT James, we are in the Philippines. Lets hope Justice will prevail and you can get some restful days and nights. :) Jack P. :tiphat: That is why I am not worried I have only told the truth even if it looked unfavorable towards myself, have not hidden a thing from investigators or lawyers, and I have the best lawyer in this Region in my corner. :santa_smiley: Edited December 19, 2012 by jamesmusslewhite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesmusslewhite Posted December 19, 2012 Author Posted December 19, 2012 Jerome Devocion (Harry's Doyle's Drive) was arrested at 9am this morning and is presently being held at PPO here in Surigao City. When I get more details I will post it on the forum. An arrest warrant had been previously issued on the charge of "Arson" in the New Years morning fire of the family home of Harry Doyle's former secretary Miss Kima. Arson is a none bailable offense here in the Philippines, so he should sit comfortably in a cell until the trial. Miss Kima and six other family member all barely escaped with their lives. It not for heavy rains that evening which had heavily saturated the wood of their dwelling and those of their neighbors, it is possible that the gasoline used to set the blaze could have quickly engulfed the home trapping Miss Kima and her family within the blaze. The heavy rains of that even also probably helped to stop other neighboring wood framed homes from also catching fire. When I get more details I will post it on the forum 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBeatMeAtTennis Posted December 20, 2012 Posted December 20, 2012 Well that must take a bit of strain off yourself, having one of them locked up is one less to worry about. Take care over the Christmas Holidays 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesmusslewhite Posted January 13, 2013 Author Posted January 13, 2013 Doyle widow get access to half of investment funds Ruling: Judge says it doesn’t Matter if woman played a role In the murder By Don MacPherson macpherson@dailygleaner.com A woman implicated in the murder of her husband in the Philippines has succeeded in getting access to half the money in an account she held jointly with the deceased Fredericton man. Erma Undang (Jane) Doyle, 35, applied to the court of Queen’s Bench in Fredericton late last year to gain access to a joint account she held with her husband Harry Doyle. Harry Doyle was shot to death by two gunmen in the Philippines Aug. 12th in front of his wife, 12-year-old son, and other witnesses. In addition to the alleged gunmen, brothers Jeffery and Johnny Parian, investigators with the Philippines National Police have accused Jane Doyle and family bodyguard Jerome Devocion of conspiring to kill Harry Doyle, a Fredericton man who divided his time between the capital city and his home in the Philippines. In the decision issued last week, Justice Judy Clendening ruled regardless of whether Jane Doyle had a role in her husband’s death, case law indicates she’s entitled to half of the funds in the disputed investment account at BMC Nesbitt Burns. “The question of whether Jane Doyle was involved in or caused the death of Harry Doyle has not been determined,” the judge wrote in her Jan. 2 decision. “He does leave an estate worth $1.5 million, including this disputed account. At some future time Jane Doyle may or may not be entitled to the estate as devised in Harry Doyles’s will. Clendening cited case law indicating even if someone is found to be guilty of some wrongdoing in the death of another, he or she doesn’t lose his or her interest in an existing asset. “An insurance policy, for instance, does not create an interest in the wrongdoer except on the death of the policyholder. In the case at bar, Jane Doyle already had an interest in the investment account before Harry Doyle’s death,” she wrote. Jane Doyle had an existing interest in the investment account before Harry Doyle’s death, Clendening found, and ordered half of the funds released to her. However, the judge noted it would be wrong to give Jane Doyle access to all the funds. “Jane Doyle … is the trustee of the whole investment account, and she holds an undivided one-half intrest for herself and at this point an undivided one-half interest for Harry Doyle’s estate,” Clendening wrote. “To allow otherwise at this stage could result in an unjust enrichment for Jane Doyle.” Harry Doyle’s will has been disputed by Stephen Doyle, his son from a previous relationship. Furthermore, Harry Doyle’s sister – Ann Jean Doyle, who was named as the executrix of the disputed will – has her late brother’s assets frozen in the wake of the allegations against Jane Doyle. Filipino police have alleged Jane Doyle and Devocion were lovers and are seeking a paternity test to determine who’s the father of Jane Doyle’s second son, who was born in Fredericton in December. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Hounddriver Posted January 13, 2013 Posted January 13, 2013 (edited) And that is one of the many things wrong with the Canadian legal system. She can kill him, take half his assets. Even if she is found guilty in this she may spend spend a few years in a country club prison in Canada (they WILL NOT deport her to a country where she will face a harsher penalty for the crime than she would in Canada). During that time the money is earning interest for her and she will be out spending it before a divorce would have even been finalized. Equal rights for women, Hooo rah! Edit: It also does not matter to the Canadian courts if the kid was paternally his or if she had a lover. If he accepted the kid as his or if the kid called him daddy then he is the father. Edited January 13, 2013 by Dave Hounddriver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now