I have refrained from commenting about Aug. 23 hostage tragedy because so much has been said about it already that I wasn't sure what more I could add. But as recent developments have come to light, I've decided to put in my two cents.
According to the Sept. 8 edition of the "
Philippine Daily Inquirer", a respected local newspaper, witnesses said that the hostage taker, Rolando Mendoza, arrived by car at 9:30 at the point where, according to the bus driver and a passenger, he commandeered the bus 15 minutes later. However —and here's the bizarre part— the SWAT
team was alerted at 9:07 a.m and was deployed at 9:15. This was of course long before the perpetrator seized the bus or even showed up at spot where he hijacked the vehicle. In other words, as the PDI said,
the police were "tipped off" ahead of the event.
The attorney representing the SWAT
team claims that this sequence time line was erroneously reported as the result of an honest mistake and will be corrected, but
the police stand by
the original time that they were first notified of the event. If that's the case, it means at least one other person was in on the crime and for whatever reason dropped the dime on Mendoza. Yet this wrinkle only surfaced today in the course of a hearing held by the committee investigating the takeover.
Now here's something else that's not clear to me, and I've not yet seen this point mentioned elsewhere: Had Mendoza already targeted the particular tour bus that he hijacked? If so, how did he know that the bus was going to be at the place, Fort Santiago, where he seized it? Inasmuch as this vehicle was a tour bus and not a public utility transport, it didn't follow a schedule. Alternatively, perhaps it's a popular spot for tour buses and Mendoza was aware of that and instead happened to pick this one at random?
Also, when the PDI said Mendoza alighted from his car at the hijack location, it didn't say from which side, the passenger or driver's seat. If the former, then does this mean that someone drove him to there? If so, whoever that person was had to know what Mendoza was up to as he was already decked out in fatigues and carrying a rifle. And if there was another person in the car, a likely suspect is his brother who later made a scene and was taken away by police at the location where the bus finally wound up at the Quirino Grandstand in Rizal Park.
When Mendoza saw his brother being dragged away, this supposedly set him off into the shooting frenzy that left eight passengers dead plus Mendoza.himself who was shot supposedly by police when they stormed the bus.
What apparently drove Mendoza to carry out the hijacking was hopelessness over his allegedly wrongful employment termination, attendant loss of retirement benefits, and subsequent denial of due process regarding his appeal of the dismissal. Perhaps out of desperation he figured that taking hostages was the only way that he could get the authorities to listen to him. I certainly can't condone Mendoza's actions. Yet I do understand how a perceived injustice that has cost a person his livelihood and reputation can cause him to become unhinged and lash out irrationally.
The possibility that Mendoza originally had a companion with him, the time line discrepancy , the unprofessional manner in which
the police assaulted the bus to free the hostages, and the conditions under which Mendoza lost his job are just a few of the matters that I hope will be covered in the the panel's report which is due for release later this month. IMO, the information that's been made available thus far contains too many anomalies. May truth not wind up as the ninth victim.