You're currently signed in as:
User

EVELYN ONG v. JUDGE MAXWEL S. ROSETE

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

2014-09-23
PER CURIAM
An accusation of bribery is easy to concoct and difficult to disprove. The complainant must present a panoply of evidence in support of such an accusation. Inasmuch as what is imputed against the respondent judge connotes a grave misconduct, the quantum of proof required should be more than substantial.[16]  Concededly, the evidence in this case is insufficient to sustain the bribery and corruption charges against the respondent. Both Luy and Sula have not witnessed respondent actually receiving money from Napoles in exchange for her acquittal in the Kevlar case.  Napoles had confided to Luy her alleged bribe to respondent.
2005-02-23
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
In Ong v. Judge Rosete,[40] we held that:The Court will not shirk from its responsibility of imposing discipline upon erring members of the bench. At the same time, however, the Court should not hesitate to shield them from unfounded suits that only serve to disrupt rather than promote the orderly administration of justice. This Court could not be the instrument that would destroy the reputation of any member of the bench, by pronouncing guilt on mere speculation.