CEBUANO businessman Peter Lim appeared before the Department of Justice (DOJ) yesterday afternoon and submitted his counter-affidavit to the illegal drugs trade complaint filed against him along with convicted drug lord Peter Co and self-confessed drug dealer Kerwin Espinosa.
Accompanied by his lawyer, Lim appeared before Assistant State Prosecutors Michael John Humarang and Aristotle Reyes to subscribe his counter-affidavit.
Lim, in his counter-affidavit said he is not the Peter Go Lim alias Jaguar referred to in the complaint filed by the Philippine National Police-Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (PNP-CIDG) and that he was also never engaged in the sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution and transportation of illegal drugs as alleged in the complaint.
“This case should be seen for what it is — persecution based on malicious speculation. Since the complaint is based solely on the hearsay testimony of an incredible witness, and relies on sheer guesswork, I humbly implore his Honorable Office for a proper and careful evaluation of the evidence in this preliminary investigation, especially considering that the charge involved is a non-bailable offense,” Lim said.
“To reiterate, I am not the Peter Go Lim aka Jaguar who is named as one of the respondents in this case. Neither am I the Peter Lim being alluded (to) in media reports as an alleged big-time drug lord. I have never been and will never engage in the illegal drug business that destroys the lives of other people,” he added.
He pointed out that he was not a “China man” as reported but a Filipino who was born in Manila in 1946 and resided in Cebu for the last 70 years.
He said the confusion may have arisen from reports that drug personalities have been using the name “Peter Lim” as their alias and that he even has thousands of namesakes in the country.
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.
