[Answer/discuss the question below. Or jump to Legal Ethics Essay Questions: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10; Legal Ethics Multiple Choice Questions: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 20; See also Instructions and 2013 Bar Exam: Information, Discussions, Tips, Questions and Results]
You are a lawyer working at the Office of the Special Prosecutor and you are part of the team handling the case against former Senator Avido who is charged with plunder. Based on your assessment of the evidence that the complainant Linda submitted, you know that the case against former Senator Avido is weak, although you instinctively feel that he is guilty. You inform your friend Atty.Curioso (who works with the office of Senator Elmismo, a known political rival of Senator Avido) regarding your instinctive feeling about Senator Avido. Atty. Curioso springs a surprise by giving you a recording of the wiretapped conversation between Senator Avido and Napo, a private party co-accused, about the transaction complained of and how they would split the proceeds.
What will you do under these circumstances? (1%)
(A) Disregard the wiretapped conversation as it is inadmissible and will not serve any useful purpose in the trial of the case.
(B) Present the wiretapped conversation in court; although inadmissible, its introduction and the disclosure of its existence is a right that the public is entitled to.
(C) Leak the wiretapped conversation to the media, to let the public know what really happened.
(D) Submit the wiretapped conversation to the Senate which is in the best position to determine what to do with it.
(E) Let Napo privately know, through 3rd parties, that you are aware of the existence of the taped conversation, with the hint that he can still hope for a lighter penalty if he would cooperate.