PART 5 
      'the logbook: it if it ain't......... broken, why fix it?''

      The court accused the security guard in Paco’s condominium in Quezon City of lying.

       It noted why the entry in his logbook was “written on the top page of the logbook and not on the line where entries are supposed to be written”.  

        The guard reasoned out in his testimony “Paco and Leah (Montalvan) went out and because he was busy entertaining Albert David (the person in charge of the condo) he was not able to immediately enter into his logbook Paco’s going out with Leah at 10:15 P.M.” of the July 16, 1997.  He wrote his entry on the top page “because he had already made other entries before he could enter Paco’s going out with Leah".

     He stated that he could have entered Paco’s entry on the fourth line which was vacant but he thought that it was already too far to enter it after 22:30 (10:30 P.M.) so he decided to write it "on top of the page”.

     However, the court was completely silent on the other entries, which are more important. On line 10 of the same page where the court had questioned, there is an entry at 0010H (12:10 A.M. of July 17, 1997) showing what time Leah came back in. Also on line 23, there is an entry at 0245H (2:45 A.M. of July 17, 1997) what time Paco came back to his condo.

      Why the necessity to ‘fix’ the log- book when one entry alone clearly established  that Paco was in Manila at 2:45 A.M. of July 17, 1997. There is no way that this entry can be falsified or just added to the logbook.

    
COURT DISREGARDS LOGBOOK. The court was completely silent on the entries showing when Lea Montalvan  and Paco Larrañaga return to their rooms.                                           .