P817M unexplained wealth report did not include Sara Duterte’s records

MANILA, Philippines — An expert witness conceded on Monday that his report showing that Vice President Sara Duterte had P817 million in alleged unexplained wealth was based on available documents and did not include records from the vice president and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio.

The prosecution presented forensic financial analyst Alexander Cabrera last week in connection with Article II of the impeachment complaint against Duterte, which alleges that she amassed unexplained wealth, failed to declare all her assets, and failed to divest from her business interests.

READ: Analyst: VP Sara didn’t declare P817 million in wealth

Article continues after this advertisement

Returning to the witness stand for cross-examination by the defense, Cabrera was asked how he arrived at the P817-million figure, which supposedly represented the vice president’s undeclared wealth from 2022 to 2025, or during her first four years in office.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“As the appointed forensic auditor of the panel of prosecutors, it is your opinion, sir, that the spouses Carpio had an undeclared wealth of 817.8 million as of 2025, correct?” defense counsel Kristine Ferrer asked.

When Cabrera answered in the affirmative, Ferrer asked whether the figure was based on the documents provided to him by the prosecution.

Cabrera again answered in the affirmative.

Ferrer then pointed out that the expert’s report was composed of two items: the couple’s supposed undeclared assets and undeclared income.

Article continues after this advertisement

When the witness again answered in the affirmative, the defense lawyer asked, “So, your report does not contain any undeclared liabilities?”

“None,” Cabrera said.

Article continues after this advertisement

Ferrer went on to ask whether the witness had examined or used any documents from the vice president and her husband.

The witness explained that they tried to look for documents in the couple’s answer to the impeachment complaint but could not find any.

“So, that is a yes. You did not use any document coming from the respondent and her spouse?” the defense lawyer pressed.

“Had there been, I would have used it,” the witness answered.

When Ferrer asked whether he had also interviewed the couple and their accountant or auditor, Cabrera reiterated that his report was based on documents only.

Asked whether he had considered the bank documents in the vice president’s possession, the witness said he examined only the bank records available to them.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

“If they have other bank documents, I am not aware of them,” Cabrera said. /mcm