Luistro: Sara Duterte trial ‘bloodbath’ real, but it’s on defense’s side

MANILA, Philippines — The “bloodbath” that Vice President Sara Duterte imagined would happen in her impeachment trial came true, but it was not in the way she would have wanted, Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro said on Friday.

Luistro, lead public prosecutor for the impeachment, said in a press briefing that the bloodbath happened instead within Duterte’s camp, or the defense panel, as their witnesses’ testimony favored the prosecution.

“May bloodbath nga (There is a bloodbath), but the bloodbath is happening in the defense and not in the prosecution,” Luistro said after being asked about Duterte’s previous statements.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: VP Duterte on impeach trial: ‘I want a bloodbath’ 

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

Manila Rep. Joel Chua, also a public prosecutor who was with Luistro during the briefing, explained that the bloodbath happened because the defense panel has been bombarded by punches from the prosecution, yet it has not been able to land any of its attacks when it was their turn to present evidence.

“Duguan na sila eh, ‘di ba?  So, so far hanggang ngayon di pa sila tumatama, ‘yong suntok nila sa prosecution.  Bugbog-bugbog na sila eh,” he added.

(It’s because they are already bloodied, right?  So, so far, up to now, they have yet to land their punches against the prosecution.  But they are already beaten up.)

Luistro and Chua were referring to Duterte’s several statements pertaining to a bloodbath during the trial.

Article continues after this advertisement

The first time Duterte mentioned blood in relation to the impeachment proceedings against her was during a thanksgiving mass in Davao City after the May 2025 elections.  According to Duterte, she is eager for a “bloodbath” once the impeachment trial for the first set of complaints starts at the Senate.

This was for the first set of impeachment complaints filed against Duterte.  However, the trial did not push through as the Supreme Court declared the first set of Articles of Impeachment against Duterte unconstitutional, based on a petition filed by the vice president herself.

Article continues after this advertisement

Several lawmakers and lawyers supportive of Duterte’s impeachment poked fun at the Vice President’s alleged contradicting statements, as she had been vocal about a bloodbath but supposedly acted towards avoiding it.

Last March, House prosecutor and Mamamayang Liberal party-list Rep. Leila de Lima asked Duterte twice as to where her aspiration for a “bloodbath” is as her statements back then allegedly show a bid to evade accountability.

De Lima said that instead of answering the questions and issues hurled against her, Duterte is resorting to diverting discussions by questioning moves to protect documents and witnesses that may be vital to the impeachment proceedings.

READ: Where’s ‘bloodbath’ now? De Lima says Duterte scared of impeachment 

After the start of her trial in July, Duterte once again referred to her impeachment trial as a “bloodbath,” this time adding that she expects to be “bloodied but unbowed.”

Duterte said this in a short statement, when she met with her lawyers in the Senate.  In response, another House prosecutor — this time Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon — urged Duterte to personally face the impeachment court, as she cannot participate in a bloodbath but at the same time field proxies for her.

After the defense panel presented six witnesses since Monday, different members prosecution have been adamant that their testimonies failed to counter the evidence against Duterte — adding that in some ways, even bolstered the prosecutors’ arguments.

On Thursday, prosecution spokesperson and Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong said in a separate press briefing that the allegations raised under Article II have not been disputed, and therefore causing panic within its ranks.

Alonto Adiong said he is basing this on the defense panel’s decision to withdraw the presentation of several witnesses, which he said may be a sign of a change in their strategy.

On the 43rd day of Duterte’s trial, the defense stated that it would no longer call several witnesses, including Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI) senior vice president and lawyer Paul Roderick Ysmael.

Chua, meanwhile, said during Thursday’s briefing that the defense’s withdrawal of banking officials may have been brought by a yearning to play safe, as pushing with their plan may have led to more information against their client.

Chua said this after being asked whether the alleged presence of dollar accounts under the vice president’s name was the reason why the defense begged off from presenting BPI senior vice president and lawyer Paul Roderick Ysmael.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Chua said he cannot say for certain whether this was the case, but he believes the decision aimed to prevent the opening of a Pandora’s box. /mr