Week 16 of Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial saw the beginning of the her defense. The man scheduled to be the first witness dropped out the previous week. That left Davao City Assessor Jaime Adalin to fill his shoes. He did not make a good impression on the Senator-judges. First of all he tried to claim a restaurant can be a residence.
![]() |
| https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2026/11/09/2568988/resto-residential-land-defense-witness-answer-draws-senator-judges-ire |
Senator-Judge Raffy Tulfo accused Vice President Sara Duterte's first defense witness of "lying through his teeth" Monday, November 9 after he sought to explain why a property declared as residential could be a restaurant.
Davao City Assessor Jaime Adalin was questioned about a property marked "910" on the city's property identification map that is occupied by Prime Bistro, a commercial establishment.
Adalin testified that the property covered by a Transfer Certificate of Title ending in 775 was the same property declared in Duterte's Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth.
The vice president's SALN describes the property as a "residential lot," but the actual property is occupied by the restaurant.
Asked about the apparent discrepancy, Adalin said a building may appear commercial while actually being used for residential purposes.
"There are times when a building is commercial but its use is residential," Adalin said.
The explanation drew a sharp response from Tulfo.
"It's clearly stated that Prime Bistro is commercial... He said it was commercial, but it's being used as residential. He's lying through his teeth, making it look as though he's taking us for fools,"Tulfo said
"So you set up a dining area, you put up a sign, just so you could sleep there? That seems to be what this witness is implying."
Prime Bistro is a Davao City restaurant on a property registered under Duterte's husband, lawyer Manases Carpio.
The National Bureau of Investigation previously cited the property among assets it was examining for alleged discrepancies in the couple's SALN declarations.
Records presented during the impeachment trial show that the property includes land with an assessed value of about P82,000 and a separate building. Tax declarations placed the combined market value of the land and building at roughly P9 million, while Duterte's SALN listed an acquisition cost of P10 million.
Adalin was called by the defense to testify about tax declarations and tax maps involving the Matina Crossing property and to support its position that the property had been disclosed in Duterte's SALN.
This exchange led Senator Raffy Tulfo to call him a lair.
Second of all Adalin's tone was apparently flippant and joking which irked some Senators. He was also evasive when asked if he traveled to China as part of a contingent of LGU officials paid for by the Chinese consulate.
![]() |
| https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2338362/defense-witness-answers-in-sara-duterte-trial-irk-erwin-tulfo |
A Davao City assessor testifying for Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense team in her impeachment trial was warned on Tuesday that he could be cited for contempt after evading questions about whether he had traveled to China in 2025.
Engineer Jaime Adalin was presented by the defense in connection with allegations that Duterte had unexplained wealth and failed to truthfully declare all her assets in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN).
Noting that Adalin was evasive during cross-examination, private prosecutor Benjamin Tolosa Jr. asked probing questions to test his credibility.
Tolosa initially asked Adalin when he was appointed city assessor. Adalin said he was appointed in 2017, when Duterte was the city mayor.
“So she (Duterte) gave you the permanent position,” the prosecutor quipped.
“You would also admit that sometime in November 2025, you were one of the LGU (local government unit) officials of Davao who went to China on an all-expenses-paid tour sponsored by the Chinese consulate. Is that correct?” Tolosa further asked.
Defense lawyer Lindon Miguel Bacquel objected to the question on the grounds of relevance, but presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero directed Adalin to answer.
“I think that is irrelevant,” Adalin replied, drawing laughter from the courtroom.
“You’re being funny there, Engineer Jimmy. You’re being funny there,” Escudero said.
“Actually, I really can’t recall,” Adalin said.
Tolosa expressed disbelief that Adalin could not recall the trip, which supposedly took place only last year.
Senator-judge Vicente “Tito” Sotto III later took the floor, stressing that the question was important to “gauge the credibility of the witness.”
Sotto said the court could obtain the information from the Bureau of Immigration if Adalin did not want to answer.
Escudero then pressed Adalin on whether he could not recall the trip itself or merely the date it took place.
“Perhaps the date, Sir,” Adalin said.
“But you did travel to China around that date, around that time?” Escudero asked.
“Ah, perhaps? Again, I don’t have the records. I can’t possibly remember all your trips, can I?” Adalin answered.
Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo did not find Adalin’s answers funny and reminded him that the court could cite him for contempt.
“Mr. Presiding Officer, it seems this witness is making a fool of us. Sir, may I remind you that you are under oath. You cannot make a mockery of your testimony. We can cite you for contempt,” he said.
“Just to remind you, Sir, we are conducting a serious proceeding here. You are being asked whether you went there, but you refuse to say. You cannot even recall the date. If you really don’t know, then just say you don’t know,” he added.
“Mr. Presiding Officer, I just want to remind the witness that he is under oath. Whether he chooses to lie is up to him, but there are consequences for doing so,” Tulfo also said.
After much grilling Adalin eventually did admit he traveled to China.
Another issue for Adalin was his confirmation of a certain property not explicitly listed in Duterte's SALN was actually listed in her SALN. Through questioning it was revealed he used Google maps to superimpose the property map. This dumbfounded Rep. Tolosa who noted that none of the information used to identify the property as Sara's are in the SALN.
![]() |
| https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2338540/assessor-quizzed-why-confirm-property-when-vps-saln-has-no-details |
After claiming that lawyer Manases Carpio’s property matched the item declared by Vice President Sara Duterte, the Davao City land assessor was questioned how he was able to make that connection when Duterte’s Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) did not contain details.
Counsel for the prosecution Benjamin Tolosa Jr. raised this question on Monday, at the resumption of Duterte’s impeachment trial, after Davao City Assessor Engr. Jaime Adalin claimed that the Carpio’s 379-square-meter parcel of land in Davao City’s Matina Crossing is the same as the property declared by his wif, particularly the residential lot in Barangay 74-A.
Adalin, the defense’s first witness for the impeachment trial explained that he used a property identification map to confirm that Matina Crossing is the same with Barangay 74-A, and the Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) and tax declarations to match the assessed value and fair market value of the two properties.
"It was based on the property identification map, if you will overlay that property identification map with Google, you can see where it is located. And as far as the term 74-A, again, as I mentioned in our comprehensive land use plan, 74-A is the term used there," Adalin said.
"So to clarify, what you’re stating is that you were able to identify, specifically, using this property identification map where the lot is shaded in red, the one with ending numbers 910. This is the property, you’re pertaining to the property location based on the TCT, right, because we can see the coordinates there through the TCT," Tolosa added, which Adalin confirmed.
But Tolosa pressed Adalin how he came to that conclusion when there are no coordinates, exact block and lot numbers, for the property that Duterte declared in her SALN.
"When you check the tax declaration, there is a block number, lot number, street, et cetera. Correct?"' Tolosa asked. "But all of this information is not in the SALN, right? Other than the barangay, you cannot see what coordinates the property is, correct engineer?"
“What was stated in the SALN and as per the document is 74-A,” Adalin said.
"Exactly, so what was mentioned is only the barangay, and the exact coordinates of the property are not in the SALN, correct?" Tolosa asked again, which Adalin confirmed.
"If the tax declaration is attached to the SALN, that could be very easy to identify. Because the deed of sale as presented, what is reflected there is the title or formal title. So again, this SALN is a document that we did not produce," Adalin admitted, when quizzed by Presiding Officer Francis Escudero and Senator-judge Panfilo Lacson.
While there are different descriptions for the lot purchased by Carpio and the one declared under Duterte’s 2024 and 2025 SALN, Adalin pointed out that both had the same assessed value of P82,046 and a current fair market value of P2,051,150.00.
However, the acquisition cost of the two properties differed: the lot was supposedly bought by Carpio for P6 million while Duterte declared an acquisition cost of P10 million — leading the prosecution to believe that these are two different properties, and one of them was not declared by Duterte in her SALN.
Also, Tolosa pointed out that Barangay 74-A or Matina Crossing is a big area, and there is a possibility that there are other properties inside the said barangay.
"It’s not only this property ending in TCT 0775 that is inside (this barangay), right?" Escudero asked. "That is the question of Atty. Tolosa, this is a big barangay, and how did you know that this is the same property as declared by the vice president in her SALN when only the barangay was named."
"Even in the province, only barangays are mentioned in the address, even us, our address only refers to the barangay. So how can you support your claim when there is no lot number, no street, indicating where the property mentioned in the SALN is located," Escudero added.
During the hearing last October 1, two property registrars presented by the prosecution as witnesses testified that two parcels of land in Davao City purchased by Carpio were not reflected in Duterte’s SALN.
According to Davao City Register of Deeds IV Kathy Florence Baldonado, Carpio supposedly purchased a 379-square-meter parcel of land located in Juna Subd., Matina Crossing, Talomo, Davao City, Davao del Sur.
However, even Escudero himself said during that trial day that he was not able to find this property in Duterte’s SALN.
Aside from Baldonado, Samal Deputy Register of Deeds III Marco Pineda said that another parcel of land measuring 751 square meters was purchased by Carpio in Matanos, but was not declared in Duterte’s SALN.
According to Pineda, the records of the registry show that Carpio acquired the land on March 15, 2018 for P3,453,849. But the defense has maintained that these properties were declared by Duterte in her SALN
Adalin said the information was in the tax return and if that was attached to the SALN that would make identification easier. However, Duterte's tax return is not her SALN. That is a huge evidentiary gap he is attempting to leap.
Senator-judge Raffy Tulfo tore into defense witness and GenCorp corporate counsel Suzette Balucanag-Punay, accusing her of being either completely unprepared or simply playing dumb during her testimony. The confrontation centered on a massive financial discrepancy regarding more than two million pesos paid to Vice President Sara Duterte between 2022 and 2025.
![]() |
| https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2339777/raffy-tulfo-witness-not-ready-to-explain-vp-dutertes-gencorp-earnings |
The witness was either “not ready” or “nagmamaang-maangan” (playing dumb) for failing to fully explain the P2 million allegedly received by Vice President Sara Duterte from GenCorp Industries Inc., Senator-judge Raffy Tulfo said on Wednesday.
Tulfo made the remark during the Senate impeachment trial after defense witness and lawyer Suzette Balucanag-Punay revealed that the vice president received a total of P2,142,369.14 as a supposed “return of capital.”
According to Balucanag-Punay, in-house corporate counsel of GenCorp, Duterte is not listed as a shareholder of the company but has a “loose investment” in one of the Jollibee branches owned and operated by GenCorp.
She said Duterte’s “loose investment” in the Jollibee Times Square branch dates back to when it was supposed to be operated by Davao Bounty Times Food Corp.
This “loose investment” was then carried over to Great Jolly Times then to Time Square Bee Foods Corp. to GenCorp when these companies acquired the branch.
The witness also testified that Duterte received P337,500 in 2022; P555,750 in 2023; P612,419.14 in 2024; and P636,700 in 2025; hence the P2.1 million total of “return of capital.”
However, during the cross examination of prosecution counsel Lorna Kapunan, the articles of incorporation of Davao Bounty Times Food Corp. showed that Duterte only had a paid up capital of P46,875 only, with a subscribed amount of P187,500.Asked to explain why the supposed “return of capital”–-which was understood to be just giving back the initial investment as opposed to “return on capital” which was understood as profit for the investment made—reached more than P2 million, the witness said she cannot find other documents to explain the nature of the supposed investments.
"I have been wondering about this for a while. She knows why she was called as a witness today—to address Vice President Sara Duterte’s unexplained wealth and explain the unexplainable—yet there are so many things she does not know, Tulfo said.
According to Tulfo, the witness could have asked GenCorp to explain and check whether it was return of or return on investment.
"It seems to me that despite being a lawyer for 15 years, you are not ready, or you are just playing dumb,” the senator-judge said further.
Balucanag-Punay was presented to debunk the prosecution’s claim that Duterte did not divest her business interests during her tenure as vice president.This allegation forms part of Article II which also alleges that Duterte amassed unexplained wealth and did not fully or truthfully disclose all her assets, liabilities, and net worth on her Statements of Assets Liabilities and Net worth.
Balucanag-Punay claimed the payouts were merely a return of capital from an unlisted investment in a fast-food franchise. However, prosecution counsel Lorna Kapunan exposed corporate filings showing Duterte's actual paid-up capital was just under forty-seven thousand pesos. When asked to explain how a minor initial stake yielded over two million pesos in returned capital without accounting for actual profits, the witness admitted she could not produce any supporting documentation.
The trial ended early this week to accommodate the ASEAN meeting. It will resume on November 19th.























