Jul 14, 2020 @ 15:26
NBI submits initial report into Sulu shooting incident
Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra on Tuesday said that the National Bureau of Investigation has already submitted an initial report into the Sulu ‘misencounter’ where four Army soldiers died last June 29.
“The NBI field agents have submitted their initial investigation report. The report contained the accounts of ten witnesses, the forensic findings of the medico-legal and ballistic experts, and the affidavits of the family members of the deceased army intelligence officers.”
” The ballistic report clearly indicated that the shells and slugs found at the scene of the crime matched the firearms of the police officers involved. ”
” The bullet wounds were mostly on the back of the body, with one soldier sustaining eight wounds,” Guevarra said when sought for updates on the NBI’s independent probe into the bloody incident.
The Justice secretary said that he’s expecting the NBI to file formal charges before the DOJ anytime soon.
The NBI has been conducting an independent probe into the alleged misencounter between Army officers and policemen in Jolo, Sulu after the leadership of the Philippine National Police and Armed Forces of the Philippines have been giving conflicting versions.
The fatalities were identified in a police report from the Jolo municipal police station as Maj.Arvin Indamog, commanding officer of the Army’s 9th Intelligence Service Unit (9ISU), Capt. Irwin Managuelod, field station commander, and intelligence operatives Sgt. Eric Velasco and Cpl. Abdal Asula.
Reports from the Sulu Provincial Police Office said the policemen involved claimed self-defense, after the soldiers supposedly lifted and pointed their firearms first to the police.
The report added that the incident occurred when the soldiers allegedly tried to flee the police station after they were brought in for questioning.
The Army, however, refuted the claims, calling the initial police report as “fabricated” and “misleading.”
Army spokesman Col. Ramon Zagala Jr. maintained that the troops could not have engaged the policemen in a firefight as they had “properly coordinated and identified themselves” as soldiers.