Vice President’s threats were “serious” — witness

NBI regional director Jeremy Lotoc told the impeachment court that the vice president’s threats made on an online press conference was “absolute” and “serious.”

NBI regional director Jeremy Lotoc at the witness stand during the impeachment hearing on Monday, July 12, 2026. Screengrab from the livestream.

Manuel Mogato | July 13, 2026

MANILA — Vice President Sara Duterte-Carpio hurled invectives against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr and two others in a video, during an online press conference in November 2024, threatening to kill them.

At the fourth hearing in the impeachment trial of the vice president, the prosecution panel presented a senior official from the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to strengthen their case that a crime of grave threat and inciting to sedition was committed by Duterte.

NBI regional director Jeremy Lotoc, who was the former chief of the NBI cybercrime division, told the impeachment court that the vice president’s threats made on an online press conference was “absolute” and “serious.” (Also read: Prosecution to present proof that Duterte hired ‘hitman’ to kill Marcos)

“Threat is actual,” Lotoc said, adding the threats were “disturbing” and “alarming.”

Lotoc, who headed the cyber threat investigation two years ago, said the vice president’s statements could foment chaos and anarchy.

He said the vice president was “fuming mad”, a factor which led investigators to conclude the threats were real and absolute.

Lotoc is the second prosecution witness presented to convince the senators, sitting as impeachment judges, that the vice president betrayed the public trusts and violated the Constitution.

Lotoc said the vice president cannot hide behind “freedom of expression” saying the threats “satisfied the elements of a crime.”

“Well under the law… the NBI has primary jurisdiction to undertake investigations on cases involving threats to security, and assaults against the highest officials [of the country],” he added.

Duterte’s threats made in public that she had hired an assassin goes beyond the bounds of free expression, and the law.

The respondent’s counsel attempted to discredit the witness’ testimonies by pointing out discrepancies in the official investigation reports and subpoenas sent to the vice president.

Mark Vinluan, who was part of Duterte’s defense team, tried to point out that the NBI had a “biased” investigation, focusing only on the threats against the president, but did not bother to pursue the threats against the vice president.