Human Rights Watch - PBSpov-tc.pbs.org/pov/downloads/2012/pov-giveuptomorrow-discussion... · City’s Lower East Side, and the letter brought me ... Paco in Manila—300 miles

Give Up Tomorrow

A Film by Michael Collins & Marty Syjuco

Community Engagement & Education

DISCUSSION GUIDE

www.pbs.org/pov

POV

|2DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

LETTERS FROM THE FILMMAKERS

DIRECTOR’S STATEMENT

Producer Marty Syjuco and I had been

friends for a few years when his older

brother, Paco Larrañaga’s brother-in-law,

asked for our help. I had heard that Paco

was accused of murdering two women on

the island of Cebu in the Philippines, but

everyone in the family was embarrassed

to talk about it and was 100 percent sure

that the Supreme Court would overturn

his death sentence.

I retained some skepticism—until I read

the letter from the 35 “unheard witnesses”

in the case. I was in a café on New York

City’s Lower East Side, and the letter

brought me to tears. Paco was my age,

and over the previous seven years, while I

had thrived, he had waited, unjustly

condemned to execution, in a horrific

gang-run prison.

There was no way to ignore the injustice; I

had a background in video and had long believed in film’s ability to create social change. But it was only when I realized

how passionate I had become about this story that I felt the full power of the medium.

Passion alone does not make good cinema, though, and it has taken seven years to complete this project. Our first step was

to go to Los Angeles to interview two of the letter writers who attested to Paco’s whereabouts when the crime was

committed in 1997. They had left the Philippines, partially out of disgust over this case, but also because they felt haunted

by guilt—the same guilt we would feel if we were unable to reverse a clear and terrible injustice. At our first meeting in Los

Angeles, the two broke down and wept over their powerlessness and failure to make anyone listen. They painted a picture

of cronyism, corruption and class and race conflict in the Philippines that made us realize this injustice was only the tip of

a very deep iceberg.

In the Philippines, a few people, galvanized by the opportunity to do the right thing, supported us with housing, resources,

information and encouragement. Others held back, believing that the system was beyond reform and the risk in going

against police, presidents and drug lords was too high.

Paco, who soon will have spent half his life in prison, was reticent for other reasons: When we discussed the case and prison,

he became cold and somber. But when we talked about his pre-trial life, he was full of warmth and enthusiasm. I regret

that—because of the prison environment and Paco’s experience of media as enemy—we could not adequately capture on

film the sweetness and joy in his personality that we glimpsed, and that Paco’s friends and family saw as his essential nature.

I came to understand that we could prove Paco’s innocence over and over with the facts, but that would never be enough.

We needed not only to expose a deep and complex dynamic of corruption and injustice, but also to reveal the part of the

culture of the Philippines that is human, decent and suffering.

Michael Collins

Director, Give Up Tomorrow

Director Michael Collins

Photo courtesy of Joshua Z. Weinstein

LETTERS FROM THE FILMMAKERS

|3DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

PRODUCER’S STATEMENT

I first met Paco at my brother’s wedding

to Mimi, Paco’s older sister. Eight years

younger than I, he was just an overweight

kid, and I didn’t pay him much attention.

Later, when I heard about his arrest and

trial, I went on with my life. Part of me

figured the courts would sort it out.

Another part was so inured to the injustice

and corruption that form the background

noise of the Philippines, that I, like most

Filipinos, was hobbled by fatalism.

After moving to New York and working in

film distribution, I began to crave

something more meaningful and creative.

When Paco’s sentence was elevated to

death, and I saw the letter from the 35

“unheard witnesses,” I knew I was at a

crossroads. My own mother had seen

Paco in Manila—300 miles from the scene

of the crime—on the day of the murders

and had been denied the right to testify in

court and corroborate his alibi.

I know some will question my objectivity and intent because Paco is my brother-in-law, but that relationship gave me inside

access and perspective. It also opened my eyes to a part of the Philippines that, as one of its beneficiaries, I had ignored.

My family members are mestizos, a group that traditionally benefits from endemic corruption and cronyism. Educated in

Canada and the United States, I had lived in a gated community in the Philippines, and I had been naively and willfully

ignorant of the poverty all around me—blind even to the thousands of street children who haunt our cities. My clan was well

protected by race, political connections and wealth from the worst aspects of our country’s deeply flawed system.

It was precisely my comfort in this role, and my perspectives as a political and familial insider, that made me particularly

suited—and obligated—to act in Paco’s case. I had left the Philippines, but it lived inside me. And I knew I had to return. I

love the country and have friends and family there, but I have grown to abhor the fatalism that allows people to turn away

from injustice, and that helps the elite control the poor and uneducated.

But even for the elite, the country’s poorly paid and ill-trained police are a persistent threat—to be bribed as a first resort,

and from which to escape if that fails. Under political pressure to solve crimes, they commonly charge any vaguely likely

suspect. I strongly believe that most of the Philippines’ prisoners have been denied due process or are innocent—or both,

as we found in Paco’s case—and that injustice is facilitated by the media. Once I had believed what I read and saw, but first-

hand knowledge made me question so many of my birthright preconceptions and opened not only a sea of skepticism, but

an ocean of hope.

Paco Larrañaga is just one among many. And the Philippines is not alone in failing to build the trappings of democracy,

including elections, on a solid foundation of impartial institutions, such as independent courts. There are thousands of Pacos

around the world, from Egypt to the United States. We are hoping that this film will make not only Filipinos, but people of

all nationalities, sit up, pay attention and act.

Marty Syjuco

Producer, Give Up Tomorrow

Producer Marty Syjuco

Photo courtesy of Joshua Z. Weinstein

|4DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

2 Letters From the Filmmakers

5 Introduction

6 Potential Partners

6 Key Issues

6 Using This Guide

7 Background Information

7 Paco Larrañaga Case Summary

11 Philippines Country Profile

13 Cases of Wrongful Conviction

15 Prisoner Transfer Treaties

17 Media Responsibility in the Philippines

19 Selected People Featured

in Give Up Tomorrow

22 General Discussion Questions

23 Discussion Prompts

30 Taking Action

31 Resources

33 How to Buy the Film

Writer

Faith Rogow, PhDInsighters Educational Consulting

Guide Producers and Background Research, POV

Eliza LichtVice President, Community Engagement & Education, POV

Jamie DobieCoordinator, Community Engagement & Education, POV

Aubrey GallegosAssistant, Community Engagement & Education, POV

Abby Harri

Marlaina Martin

Samantha Rivera

Nicole TsienInterns, Community Engagement & Education, POV

Design:

Rafael Jiménez

Eyeball

Copy Editor:

Natalie Danford

Thanks to those who reviewed this guide:

Michael Collins and Marty SyjucoFilmmakers, Give Up Tomorrow

TABLE OF CONTENTS CREDITS

This could be a fictional thriller—a who-

done-it with an intriguing cast of

characters. But it is very real. In 1997, as a

tropical storm beat down on an island in

the Philippines, the Chiong sisters left work

and never made it home. Paco Larrañaga, a

19-year-old student, was arrested, tried and

sentenced to death for their rape and

murder, despite overwhelming evidence of

his innocence.

Give Up Tomorrow documents Larrañaga’s

controversial trial—one of the most

sensational ever in the Philippines. The

film’s examination of the proceedings strips

the veneer of raw emotions to reveal

shocking corruption. For more than a

decade, two grieving mothers find

themselves entangled in a case that ends a

nation’s use of capital punishment but fails

to free an innocent man.

The filmmakers draw the audience into a

straightforward, yet complex, journey that

examines prison conditions, coerced

confessions, hints of political favors, media

sensationalism and the boundaries of

international law. Uncomfortably, viewers

are left to ponder the impact on individuals,

families, communities and a nation when a

system that is supposed to deliver justice

does the opposite.

INTRODUCTION

|5DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Paco Larrañaga

Photo courtesy of Thoughtful Robot

Give Up Tomorrow is well suited for use in a variety of

settings and is especially recommended for use with:

• Your local PBS station

• Groups that have discussed previous PBS and POV

films relating to criminal justice systems, unjust

imprisonment or the death penalty, including

Presumed Guilty, Prison Town, USA and Better

This World.

• Groups focused on any of the issues listed in the

Key Issues section

• High school students

• Faith-based organizations and institutions

• Cultural, art and historical organizations,

institutions and museums

• Civic, fraternal and community groups

• Academic departments and student groups at

colleges, universities and high schools

• Community organizations with a mission to

promote education and learning, such as your

local library

Give Up Tomorrow is an excellent tool for outreach and

will be of special interest to people looking to explore the

following topics:

• Citizenship

• Corruption

• Crime/criminal justice

• Death penalty

• Fair trials

• Human rights

• International law

• Journalism

• Justice

• Justice system

• Law

• Media literacy

• Philippines

• Prison/incarceration

• Spain

• Wrongful convictions

|6DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

USING THIS GUIDE

This guide is an invitation to dialogue. It is based on a belief in the power of human connection, designed for people

who want to use Give Up Tomorrow to engage family, friends, classmates, colleagues and communities. In contrast to

initiatives that foster debates in which participants try to convince others that they are right, this document envisions

conversations undertaken in a spirit of openness in which people try to understand one another and expand their

thinking by sharing viewpoints and listening actively.

The discussion prompts are intentionally crafted to help a wide range of audiences think more deeply about the issues

in the film. Rather than attempting to address them all, choose one or two that best meet your needs and interests. And

be sure to leave time to consider taking action. Planning next steps can help people leave the room feeling energized

and optimistic, even in instances when conversations have been difficult.

For more detailed event planning and facilitation tips, visit www.pbs.org/pov/outreach

POTENTIAL PARTNERS KEY ISSUES

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

|7DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Paco Larrañaga Case Summary

July 16, 1997 was a typical day for Give Up Tomorrow’s

subject, Paco Larrañaga. He attended culinary classes and

then enjoyed the nightlife in Manila with his classmates. The

next morning he was back at school for a day of exams.

Three hundred miles away on the island of Cebu, parents

Dionisio and Thelma Chiong were filing missing-persons

reports. Their daughters, Marijoy, 21, and Jacqueline, 23, had

disappeared while waiting for their father to give them a

ride home from work. The sisters would never be seen alive

again. A battered, blindfolded and handcuffed body was

soon discovered and identified as Marijoy. Jacqueline was

never found.

Two months later, Paco’s sister, Mimi, received a call

from her frightened brother saying that men in

civilian clothes were arresting him for the kidnap,

rape and murder of both Chiong sisters. Six other boys in

Cebu were also arrested. Although some of the boys’

names were on a list of juvenile delinquents because of a

previous altercation, there was no evidence linking them to

the crime.

The Chiong family is Chinese-Filipino. Paco is part of a

prominent mestizo political clan that includes a former

president. Beefy and tough, with a past of petty offenses,

he neatly fits the role of privileged thug—and that is how he

was cast by the frenzied media that swarmed his arrest and

trial and cheered his eventual sentence to death by lethal

injection.

Paco Larrañaga (right) behind bars, being interviewed by a

news reporter, shortly after he was arrested for the kidnap,

rape and murder of two sisters in the Philippines.

Photo courtesy of Arni Aclao


|8DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Initially, Paco’s family, devout Catholics like many Filipinos,

discussed his leaving the country. But they decided he

would stay and clear his name. “We didn’t think it would go

beyond preliminary investigation because we had . . . more

than 35 witnesses . . . that said this boy was nowhere near

Cebu on July 16,” said Mimi.

As the media began painting sensational portraits of the

accused boys as drug addicts, Thelma Chiong, distraught

mother of the victims, became a sensation herself. She

claimed Paco had been dating and menacing Marijoy, an

allegation he and his sister, Mimi, strenuously denied. Mimi

began to suspect that the Chiongs were hiding something.

She was right.

It turned out that Dionisio Chiong had worked at a trucking

company owned by an alleged drug lord. At the time of

his daughters’ disappearance, Dionisio had been

scheduled to testify against the drug lord at a

congressional hearing, but then he abruptly changed his

mind. Could the murders have been ordered to ensure

Dionisio’s silence? It was later discovered that the

plainclothes police who arrested Paco were the alleged

drug kingpin’s bodyguards and that the police superin-

tendent was a close friend.

The story became stranger still. While Paco and the six co-

defendants languished in prison, Thelma Chiong was

appointed vice president of the Crusade Against Violence.

Her sister was the personal secretary to the newly elected

president, Joseph Estrada, who assigned four different

agencies to tackle the investigation.

Police searched the Larrañagas’ property for a link to the

crime. No such link was found, but eight months later

prosecutors announced they had a star witness. A young

Paco's mother, Margot, being interviewed by press.

Photo courtesy of Alex Badayos


|9DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

prisoner named Davidson Rusia confessed that he was

among the gang sought for kidnapping, raping and

murdering the Chiong sisters. When the trial got underway,

the prosecution questioned Rusia for days, while Paco’s

counsel was given 30 minutes for cross-examination.

Thelma Chiong called Rusia “a gift from God” and even

brought the alleged double murderer birthday gifts in

prison. Rusia’s cellmates would later claim he had been

repeatedly tortured by police before confessing.

The Philippines has no jury system, so Paco’s fate rested in

the hands of the judge in the case, Martin Ocampo, who

made the defense team’s work difficult, even jailing them

for protesting his decision to throw out expert testimony

questioning the identification of Marijoy Chiong’s body.

When Paco’s fellow students and instructors took the stand

to verify his alibi, the judge cut short their testimony,

declaring that there were “too many” witnesses. Paco was

never allowed to take the stand.

Judge Martin Ocampo, who was even seen sleeping

through parts of the proceedings, took three

months to write his decision. The verdict, reached two

years after the crime, was devastating: Paco and his co-

defendants were found guilty and received two

consecutive life sentences. Under Philippine law, a guilty

verdict required the death penalty, so why did the judge

rule otherwise? He admitted there was insufficient proof

that the corpse was Marijoy Chiong’s. “You don’t know the

pressure I’m under,” he told reporters who asked if he

feared for his life. Five months later, he committed suicide.

The Chiong family was outraged that the young men had

not received the death penalty, and their ally President

Estrada asked the Department of Justice to change the

sentence. The Larrañaga family appealed to the Supreme

Court to protest the many violations of Paco’s constitu-

tional rights.

Thelma Chiong and her sisters dismayed reaction

to the judge's verdict of life imprisonment rather than

the death penalty.



|10DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Lawyers assured the family that Paco’s case was strong. On

February 3, 2004, Paco’s mother, like millions of others,

would hear the news of the appeal on television. Her son

was not only found guilty, but now was sentenced to death

by lethal injection.

But in another twist, the court’s new verdict awakened

widespread support for the accused young men. Student

witnesses joined Catholic priest Father Reyes in organizing

a run to raise awareness around the case, and Paco's family

sought new avenues for justice. Because his father was

Spanish, Paco was also a Spanish citizen. The family

appealed to Spain for help and Amnesty International led a

nationwide campaign that generated huge momentum. In

November 2004, activists delivered a petition with nearly

300,000 signatures to the embassy of the Philippines in

Madrid.

The country’s Supreme Court, led by a chief justice related

to Thelma Chiong, refused to budge. In a final effort, Paco’s

lawyers submitted his case to the United Nations

Commission on Human Rights, which called for his

release. The Spanish government asked Philippine

President Gloria Arroyo, who had replaced

President Estrada following his removal on corruption

charges, to grant Paco clemency. She vowed that Paco’s

life would be saved and, astonishingly, abolished the

nation’s death penalty in June 2006. The two countries

agreed that Paco would be transferred to Spain to serve

the remainder of his life sentence. Thelma Chiong tried—but

failed—to prevent the transfer.

Paco and his family hoped that his transfer to Spain would

set him off on a path to freedom, but the Spanish prison

review board would only recommend Paco for parole if he

would admit his guilt. More than two years after his transfer

to Spain and 15 years after his arrest, Paco remains in prison

but now benefits from an additional privilege of the Spanish

penal system: Due to time already served, he is granted

occasional therapeutic leaves (a few days every month) at

the prison board’s discretion, which means he receives

permission to leave during daytime hours to study and

work. The Republic of the Philippines retains jurisdiction

over the case.

The co-accused at the trial.



|11DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Philippines Country Profile

Location:

The Republic of the Philippines is a chain of 7,107 islands in

the western part of the Pacific Ocean, covering an area of

115,830 square miles in Southeast Asia. The country is

divided into three areas: Luzon to the north, Visayas in the

center and Mindanao to the south. Manila, the capital city

where Paco attended culinary school, is located in Luzon.

Cebu, the home of the Larrañaga and Chiong families, is

located in central Visayas. The archipelago was formed by

volcanic activity, and is mostly mountainous with areas of

coastal lowlands. With 20 active volcanoes, the Philippines

is part of the Pacific Ring of Fire and is thus prone to

seismic activity. The country’s tropical climate also

makes it susceptible to typhoons.

Population:

The Philippines has a population of 98 million (2012

estimate). More than 150 native languages and dialects are

spoken in the Philippines, and there are four principal

languages: Cebuano, spoken in Visayas; Tagalog, spoken

around Manila; Ilocano, spoken in northern Luzon; and

Maranao, spoken in Mindanao. To establish national unity,

the government promotes the use of Filipino, based on

Tagalog, as the national language, and it is taught all over

the country. English is also an official language of the

country, and many speak it as a second language. The

Philippines has one of the highest literacy rates of

developing countries, with over 93 percent of the

population over 10 years of age able to read. The gender

gap is significantly close with regard to health and

education.

The crowd outside the Palace of Justice.



|12DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Due to over 400 years of Spanish and American rule, more

than 90 percent of the population is Christian. A small

Muslim population also exists, around 4.6 percent, concen-

trated in central and western Mindanao. Some smaller

forest tribes still live in the more remote areas of Mindanao.

With a gross domestic product per capita of $2,370 in 2011,

economic growth in the Philippines has averaged 5 percent

over the past year, with a 7.6 percent growth rate in 2010,

the highest in 20 years. Since the global financial crisis and

recession, efforts have been made to develop programs

that boost infrastructure, and as a result the economy has

been relatively stable and resilient.

Government:

The Philippines is a representative democracy modeled

after the U.S. system of government. Under the 1987 consti-

tution, ratified under the Corazon Aquino administration, a

government was established with three branches—the

executive, with a president limited to one six-year term; a

bicameral legislature; and an independent judiciary. The

senate consists of 24 members who serve six-year terms;

half of them are elected every three years. The House of

Representatives is made up of 285 members, 229 of whom

represent single-member districts. Party-list represen-

tatives, or party representatives elected at large, occupy

the remaining 56 seats. Representatives serve three-year

terms and a maximum of three consecutive terms. Under

the constitution, the number of members of the House of

Representatives is limited to 250. However, a 2010 Supreme

Court ruling allows additional party members to sit in, if

they attained the required number of votes.

Some of the major issues affecting the political climate of

the country are corruption, cronyism and nepotism. There

are several families at the forefront of society, and they

hold a large share of both political power and economic

wealth. The incumbent president, Benigno Aquino III, ran on

an anti-corruption platform. He took office in June 2010.

Under his administration, a Truth Commission was

established. This body, led by former Supreme Court chief

justice Hilario Davide, Jr., was formed to investigate

charges of corruption, election rigging and human rights

abuses during the previous administration under Gloria

Arroyo. As of the end of 2011, Arroyo had been placed on

house arrest pending trial, and the chief justice she had

appointed to the Supreme Court had been impeached and

found guilty of corruption. The next presidential

election is slated for May 2016.

Justice:

The Supreme Court of the Philippines is composed of 15

justices, appointed by the president with recommendations

from the judicial and bar council. The justices serve on the

court until they reach the age of 70. Other courts include

the Court of Appeals, and the Sandiganbayan (“People’s

Advocate”), a special court for cases involving corruption

of government officials. While the Philippines has adopted

a legal framework similar to that of the United States, it has

not implemented a jury system. A judge hears the case and

issues a ruling. In Paco Larrañaga’s case, it was Judge

Martin Ocampo who heard the evidence and adjourned the

court for three months to write his decision.

As a result of massive case backlogs and low salaries, the

legal system is fraught with inefficiencies and corruption.

Only one percent of the national budget is allocated to the

judiciary, so very often judges and lawyers become

dependent on local politicians for resources, which allows

political influence to trickle in. This culture of impunity has

made the Philippines one of the most dangerous places for

employees in the court system. Since 1999, at least 12

judges have been killed, and the perpetrators remain

unpunished.

Sources:

Election Guide. “Philippines.”

http://electionguide.org/country.php?ID=171

Freedom House. “Philippines.”

http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2012/philippines

Reuters. “Philippines’ Aquino Sets Up ‘Truth Commission.’” June 29,

2010.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2010/06/29/idINIndia-49743820100629

U.S. Department of State. “Background Note: Philippines.”

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2794.htm

The World Bank. “GDP Per Capita.”

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD

The World Bank. “Philippines Overview.”

http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/philippines/overview


|13DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Cases of Wrongful Conviction

Though Give Up Tomorrow highlights only one case within

the Philippine judicial system, it illuminates a larger concern

over wrongful conviction, both in the Philippines and

worldwide.

The Supreme Court of the Philippines released information

in 2004 that cited a 71.77 percent judicial error rate in

capital cases in the period from 1993 to 2004, when capital

punishment was still legal, a percentage determined by the

total number of death convictions that had been either

reversed or pardoned. During this time, 651 of 907

convicted persons were saved from lethal injection due to

wrongful conviction. In recognition of this high error rate,

the Supreme Court issued a ruling on DNA evidence

that allows post-conviction DNA testing without

need of prior court order, although it also requires that a

relevant biological sample exist and that testing be likely to

result in the reversal or modification of the conviction.

Wrongful convictions are not unique to the Philippines.

According to a report released by Columbia University

researchers in May 2012, there have been a total of 2,061

inmate and ex-convicts exonerated of serious crimes in the

United States since 1989. Worldwide, DNA evidence has

assisted in clearing the names of hundreds of wrongfully-

convicted prisoners, many of whom were on death row or

facing other serious sentences. Use of DNA technology to

revisit past convictions has led to 297 exonerations in the

Judge Martin Ocampo



|14DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

United States alone. Organizations like the

Innocence Project view this as an indicator

of systemic faults in the justice system of

the United States and note that there may

be thousands in the system who were

wrongfully convicted, at least some of them

impossible to exonerate because there is no

DNA evidence for their cases.

Lengthy police station stays and interro-

gations are just one of many reasons for

wrongful convictions, which vary based on

the particular case and country. According

to the Death Penalty Information Center,

wrongful conviction in death penalty cases

was due in 45 percent of cases to

eyewitness misidentification, in 17 percent

to government misconduct, in 10 percent to

“snitches,” in 9 percent to mishandled

evidence or unqualified experts, in 8

percent to false confession and in 29

percent to other causes, including hearsay

and questionable circumstantial evidence.

(The totals add up to more than 100

percent because in many cases there is a

combination of causes at work.)

In the United States, eyewitness misidentifi-

cation was a factor in 72 percent of

post-conviction DNA exoneration cases. It

has been reported by many organizations

studying this phenomenon that race may

play a role, as 40 percent of identifications

are cross-racial and some studies have

shown that it may be more difficult for

people to identify someone of a race that is

not their own.

Sources:

Asia Times Online. “Wrongful Conviction Puts

Spotlight on Japanese Justice.”

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/NF30Dh01.html

Innocence Project. “The Causes of Wrongful Conviction.”

http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand

Innocence Project. “Eyewitness Identification Reform.”

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Eyewitness_

Identification_Reform.php

Innocence Project. “Facts on Post-conviction DNA Exonerations.”

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Facts_on_PostConviction_

DNA_Exonerations.php

The Week. “25 Years of Wrongful Convictions: By the Numbers.”

http://theweek.com/article/index/228292/25-years-of-wrongful-

convictions-by-the-numbers

Margot Larrañaga and Thelma Chiong, the two mothers

fighting for polarized versions of justice.

Photo courtesy of Arni Aclao


|15DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Prisoner Transfer Treaties

As a dual citizen of the Philippines and Spain, Paco

Larrañaga was moved to a Spanish prison under what is

known as the RP-Spain Transfer of Sentenced Persons

Agreement (TSPA). Signed on May 18, 2007 and approved

by the senates of both countries, this treaty allows foreign

prisoners to be sent to their countries of nationality to serve

out the rest of their sentences.

As of 2011, the Philippine government had established

prisoner transfer agreements with five different nations—

China, Canada, Cuba, Thailand and Spain. Though Paco’s

case is an exception, the origin of prisoner transfer treaties

is largely humanitarian—they are typically issued to protect

nationals who are incarcerated abroad under abusive and

inhumane conditions. The sentencing country (in

Paco’s case the Philippines) retains sole power

over whether or not the convicted person will be granted

amnesty or pardon, but the treaty is dependent on the

cooperation of partner nations and encourages cordial

international relations. In this case, Spain has the option to

ask the Philippines for clemency for Paco.

The RP-Spain TSPA permits transfers to be carried out only

if certain criteria are met. The sentenced person must be a

national of the state to which he or she is being transferred;

the committed offense must be criminally punishable both

in the country of offense and the country of nationality; the

sentence must be final and without other legal recourse;

and the sentenced person must have consented to the

transfer, satisfied any payment of fines and have at least

Co-defendant Josman Aznar being escorted out

after the verdict.



|16DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

one year left to serve. In Paco Larrañaga’s case, the Chiong

family reportedly received 750,000 Philippine pesos in civil

damages from the Larrañaga family (an amount equivalent

to approximately $18,000 in 2012). Once a sentenced

person or either partner nation confirms that all of these

criteria apply, a transfer request may be submitted to the

central authority of the state holding the individual.

Prisoner transfer agreements also exist in Australia, Japan,

the Americas and several European countries. This type of

agreement made national headlines in the United States

when three British businessmen (the so-called “NatWest

Three”) pled guilty to fraud during the 2007 Enron case and

were transferred to the United Kingdom prison system after

serving only six months of a 37-month sentence.

Records kept by the U.S. International Prison Transfer

Unit (the branch of the U.S. Department of Justice that

presides over prison transfer agreements involving

the United States) reveal that 595 foreign nationals were

sent back to their home countries from United States

prisons between 2008 and 2010 and 163 Americans

returned from prisons abroad in that same time period.

Sources:

abs-cbnNEWS.com. “Larrañaga Turned Over to Spain.”

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/10/06/09/larra%C3%B1aga-

turned-over-spain

Council of Europe. “Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons.”

http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/112.htm

Lee-Brago, Pia. “DFA Chief Defends RP-Spain Prison Transfer Treaty.”

The Philippine Star, September 12, 2009.

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=504546&publicationSu

bCategoryId=63

A scene from Give Up Tomorrow.



|17DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Media Responsibility in the Philippines

The media’s involvement in the Chiong case seemed unjust

and biased to many observers. From the recorded re-

enactment that demonized the seven young men on trial to

news broadcasts that referred to Paco Larrañaga by

various derogatory names, media responsibility became a

point of contention for Larrañaga’s domestic and interna-

tional supporters.

In 2011, the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism

issued a proposal for a publication that would illustrate the

Philippine media’s sensational reporting on rape and would

recommend ethical guidelines for journalists. The proposed

publication would focus on the Chiong rape case, specif-

ically, and would cite articles published in the media

outlets that covered the case, including the Philippine

Daily Inquirer, Philippine Star, Manila Bulletin,

Manila Times and the tabloids Bulgar, Tempo and Abante.

In a July 2012 opinion piece on the GMA News website,

blogger and essayist Katrina Stuart Santiago revisited the

media’s involvement in the Chiong case. She writes that

“the media saw the bad boy stereotype and sold it to us as

the truth behind, if not the premise of, this story of crime.

Certainly this was the state of media in 1997, in a grand

display of gross sensationalism and absolutely biased

reportage that I’m sure any media personality would want

to deny.”

To date, much of the attention paid to media responsibility

in the Philippines has focused on journalists charged with

The accused being interviewed by journalists.



|18DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

libel against politicians. For

example, in 2005, five

journalists in Cebu were

charged for publishing stories

about a mayor’s alleged

involvement in a bank robbery

of nearly 100 million pesos. In

2012, a forum was organized by

the Cebu Citizens-Press Council

in recognition of World Press

Freedom Day. Gabriel T. Ingles,

associate justice at the

Philippine Court of Appeals,

supported Justice Vicente

Mendoza’s idea of distin-

guishing between political and

private libel.

In June 2011, the Committee to

Protect Journalists ranked the

Philippines third in its impunity

index, which calculates

unsolved media killings as a

percentage of each country's

population. In a 2005 report on

a study of freedom of

expression and the media in the

Philippines and six other Asian

countries, Article 19, an interna-

tional human rights organization

that defends and promotes

freedom of expression and

freedom of information

worldwide, pointed to “the failure of the Philippine mass

media to provide citizens with balanced and objective

information they need on matters such as their own rights.”

Sources:

Article 19. “Freedom of Expression and the Media in the Philippines.”

http://www.article19.org/data/files/pdfs/publications/philippines-

baseline-study.pdf

Center for Media Freedom & Responsibility. “Cebu Journalists Face

Libel Suit.”

http://www.cmfr-phil.org/2005/10/06/cebu-journalists-face-libel-suit/

GMA News. “The Refusal to Give Up Today.”

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/267007/opinion/the-

refusal-to-give-up-today

Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. “Reporting on Rape.”

http://www.scribd.com/doc/50091078/Reporting-on-Rape-Media-

Coverage-Content-Analysis

Solidarity Philippines Australia Network. “Statement on Press Freedom

in the Philippines.”

http://cpcabrisbane.org/Kasama/1999/V13n3/Press.htm

SunStar Cebu. “Forum Discusses Libel in Media.”

http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/local-news/2012/05/05/forum-

discusses-libel-media-219824

Paco's mother, Margot, reading the latest headlines

on his case.



|19DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Paco Larrañaga Mimi, Paco’s sister Jaime, Paco’s brother-in-law (Mimi’shusband)

Manuel and Margot, Paco’s parents Imanol, Paco’s brother Maisha, Paco’s cousin in Spain

Tatat, Paco’s aunt in Spain

Marijoy and Jacqueline“Jackie” Chiong,the missing girls

Thelma and Dionisio Chiong,parents of the victims

Cheryl Jimenea, Thelma Chiong’s sister

Selected People Featured in Give Up Tomorrow

The Families


|20DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Leo Lastimosa Suzzane Salva Teddy Locsin, Jr.

Dong Puno Solita Monsod Lucia Gomez


Journalists and Television Personalities

Napoleon Estilles, senior policesuperintendent and friend of the

employer of Dionisio Chiong

Pablo Labra, police inspector, arrestingofficer and winner of Cebu’s 1997

Outstanding Policeman award

Teresita Galanida, prosecuting attorney

Judge Martin Ocampo, trial judge


Law Enforcement and Government Investigators

Mike Armovit, defense attorney Sandy Coronel, defense attorney Sarah de Mas, Fair Trials International

Advocates and Legal Advisors


|21DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Immediately after the film, you may want to give people

a few quiet moments to reflect on what they have seen. If

the mood seems tense, you can pose a general question

and give people some time to themselves to jot down or

think about their answers before opening the discussion:

• If you could ask anyone in the film a single question,

who would it be and what would you ask him or her?

• What did you learn from this film? What insights did

it provide?

• If a friend asked you what this film was about, what

would you say?

• Describe a moment or scene in the film that you

found particularly disturbing or moving. What was it

about that scene that was especially compelling for

you?

GENERAL DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

|22DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Dionoso and Thelma Chiong light candles

for their daughters.


DISCUSSION PROMPTS

|23DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

The Justice System

What is the role of an unbiased court and the rule of law in

a civil society? What happens when people stop trusting

the justice system? Beyond this case, can you think of

instances in which a sizable number of citizens stopped

trusting their country’s legal system? What happened as a

result?

Based on what you see in the film, how do laws and policies

prevent or facilitate corruption? Consider things like hiring

processes, how one earns a license to practice law,

requirements for arrest and detention and who has a say in

whether or not a prosecution moves forward.

Following the trial, those involved in the prosecution and

conviction received promotions. What was your reaction to

this news? When are promotions a natural and appropriate

reward for success and when are they evidence of

corruption?

Paco Larrañaga’s attorney Sandy Coronel says in the film,

“To lose hope in this case would be to concede the entire

justice system. Because I see this case as a test of how

effective and how real our justice system works.”

What was your reaction to that statement? If this

was a test case, how do you think the Filipino

justice system fared in the end?

Prosecution witnesses received reward money. Should

witnesses ever receive payment for their testimony? If not,

why not? If so, under what circumstances?

How does being in prison change Paco? What does this

suggest about the practice of imprisoning people while

they await trial?

José Bono, Spain’s minister of defense at the time, asks the

president of the Philippines to commute Paco’s death

sentence. In your view, is Spain overstepping its bounds

and interfering with the justice system of a sovereign

nation? Do you think Spain should play a role in this

situation?

Fair Trials International, Amnesty International and the

United Nations Commission on Human Rights all get

involved in Paco’s case. Given what you see in the film, is it

advisable to involve independent human rights groups in

these matters? What are those groups able to do that

others are not?

Judge Martin Ocampo


DISCUSSION PROMPTS

|24DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

The Arrest

Journalists indicate that police were under a great deal of

pressure to solve this crime. What factors create pressure

on the police? Under what circumstances do acceptable

factors (e.g., eliminating possible danger to the public) give

way to undue influence that leads to mistakes or

corruption?

Inspector Pablo Labra zeroed in on Paco because Paco’s

name appeared in police records (the result of a “minor

scuffle” in 1995). In your experience, what does a criminal

record do to a person’s reputation? How many people in

your community, family or circle of friends have criminal

records? How do you think this influences people’s

perceptions of them?

Thelma and Dionisio Chiong say that Paco pursued Marijoy

Chiong and she rejected him, implying that he was a

spurned suitor. What is the impact of this statement on

the general public? What does it suggest about the

culture’s beliefs about men and masculinity?

Evidence

If you were telling the story from Chiongs’ side, how would

you explain each piece of evidence, each trial decision and

each “coincidence”? What if you were telling the story from

the Larrañaga family’s point of view?

Thirty-five witnesses signed affidavits stating that they

were with Paco in Manila while the alleged crime was

happening in Cebu. What made this alibi evidence

believable or not believable? Which of the witnesses do you

find believable and why do you find those people

convincing?

Paco’s sister Mimi says, “You know, at first, Mrs. Chiong had

my sympathies. I’m a mom, too. I have a daughter, too. And

I felt her pain.” Did you share her sympathy? What makes

Mimi change her mind?

Paco and Josman Aznar standby during the trial.


DISCUSSION PROMPTS

|25DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

The filmmakers present several “coincidences.” What

conclusions do you draw from these events?:

• Paco was arrested by plainclothes police officers who

did not have a warrant or proper I.D. The arresting officers

also worked as bodyguards for the alleged drug lord

• Shortly before the murders, Dionisio Chiong’s trucking

business was under investigation for drug trafficking. He

was scheduled to testify against his boss, in front of a

congressional committee on drugs, but before the

scheduled date his daughters disappeared and he decided

not to testify.

• Cheryl Jimenea, Thelma Chiong’s sister, supervised

a raid of the Larrañaga family farm based on

reports of screams coming from the property.

• After the trial, Judge Martin Ocampo was found dead

in a hotel room with a suicide note.

• While Paco’s case was on appeal, President Joseph

Estrada was convicted of corruption and removed from

office.

• The chief justice of the Supreme Court of the

Philippines, which rejected international pleas to suspend

imposition of the death penalty, is related to Thelma

Chiong.

Thelma Chiong on the witness stand.


DISCUSSION PROMPTS

|26DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Trial Procedure

What was the role of the victims’ family in the prosecution

of this crime? In your view, what is the proper role for victim

families?

Davidson Rusia is arrested and confesses, then implicates

Paco and the others, in exchange for his freedom. Do you

find his story to be credible? Why or why not?

Prosecuting attorney Teresita Galanida points out that the

Philippine legal system does not use juries. Only a judge

actually hears evidence. What are the strengths and

weakness of that system?

The defense seeks a change of venue from Cebu to Manila.

If it were up to you, what criteria would you use to decide

whether or not to move a trial out of the community where

the crime was committed?

What is your explanation for these trial rulings? How

do you think Ocampo would have explained them?:

• The judge refused to hear testimony from many of

Paco’s alibi witnesses.

• Cross-examination of key prosecution witness

Davidson Rusia was limited.

• The judge excluded forensic evidence that challenged

the identification of the body.

• When defense lawyers challenged that ruling, the

judge jailed the lawyers and continued the trial with lawyers

that he appointed.

• Paco was not allowed to testify in his own defense.

In explaining his sentence of life imprisonment, Judge

Ocampo says, “You have to follow what the law says.”

Given this statement, how do you think Paco ended up

being sentenced to death?

A prosecution witness points to the accused during the trial.


The Impact and Response

What is the significance of the film’s title?

Paco Larrañaga’s father, Manuel, says, “As parents we feel

incredibly helpless... if we fall, our son falls.” What is the role

of family support in Paco’s survival?

As is the case with most convictions, the consequences

extend beyond the sentences served by the defendants.

How do Paco’s trial and conviction affect the members of

his family? How about his classmates or the community in

which he lived?

Mimi says that after the death sentence was imposed “we

didn’t know how to comfort him. How do you tell him, ‘I’m

sorry for this injustice. I’m sorry that it happened to you’?”

What would you tell Paco?

The death sentence shakes Mimi’s faith in God. How does

Father Reyes’ response to the injustice help restore that

faith? What are the other “ripple effects” of the choice

made by Father Reyes, and the other runners, to take a

public stand in support of Paco? Compare those “ripple

effects” to the effects of the verdict itself and the

corruption that was behind it.

DISCUSSION PROMPTS

|27DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

A court clerk reads the final verdict.


DISCUSSION PROMPTS

|28DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Justice

The Arroyo administration ultimately abolishes the death

penalty. What does Paco’s case offer that could or should

inform current debates over the death penalty?

Despite Thelma Chiong’s attempts to obstruct the transfer,

Paco is ultimately sent to Spain. Why doesn’t the transfer

end this case for the Philippines? What else would need to

happen for the matter to be fully resolved? What would it

take to restore justice in the Philippines?

In Spain, the prison review board says that it will grant

parole to Paco if he admits his guilt. Paco responds, “How

can I assume something I didn’t do? I can never admit guilt

because I am not guilty. I’d rather… have the death penalty

again than admit a crime that I didn’t do.” If you were Paco,

how do you think you would respond to this “Catch-22”?

At this point, what would justice look like for Paco?

The Role of Media

How would you describe the role that journalists played in

convicting Paco and in freeing him?

How did media outlets benefit from reporting on, and

sensationalizing, the murders and the trial?

Paco’s mother says, “My mother comes from a political

family. Her family name is Osmeña. So the media always

would put ‘Paco, the scion of a political and wealthy family.’

We are not wealthy. My husband works so hard. We have a

farm and he works so hard so that we can have our daily

living.” What role do you think class and ethnicity played in

Paco’s arrest and prosecution and the publicity surrounding

the case? Why would the media cast Paco as the “scion of

Thelma Chiong and the Crusade Against Violence.


DISCUSSION PROMPTS

|29DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

a political and wealthy family”? What is the appeal of a

presumably rich young man going to jail?

At the beginning of the film, reporters and investigators ask

Paco questions such as, “Who do you think framed you?” If

you had been interviewing him, would these have been your

questions? What questions would you have asked?

Television personality Teddy Locsin, Jr. calls the boys

“animals” and “drug addicts,” and he derogatorily describes

Paco as “a Spanish-blooded mestizo.” What role do word

choices, labels and prejudice play in shaping people’s

perceptions of the defendants and their case?

A re-enactment of the crime based on Rusia’s testimony is

broadcast nationally while the trial is occurring. Should

media outlets be prevented from airing such broadcasts, or

do they have the right to do so as part of free speech

or their duty to keep the public informed? If you

were a regulator, what guidelines would you offer

to govern such re-enactments?

Journalist Leo Lastimosa says, “It’s so easy to manipulate

people. It’s so easy to exploit drama and tragedies and

calamities to favor selfish interests.” In this case, who did

the manipulating and exploiting? How did they manage it in

the face of such overwhelming evidence of Paco’s

innocence?

Paco's parents, Manuel and Margot,

being interviewed by reporters in Spain.


Additional media literacy questions are available at:

www.pbs.org/pov/educators/media-literacy.php

Taking Action

• Conduct fundraisers or public information campaigns to support the efforts of human rights organizations

like Amnesty International or Fair Trials International to free people who have been unjustly imprisoned. In

the United States, local affiliates of the Innocence Project can provide suggestions on how to start or where

to find support for ongoing initiatives.

• Visit http://freepaconow.com/ and explore ways to get involved in the Free Paco Now campaign

• Research jail and prison conditions in your state, especially conditions for people awaiting trial (who have

not yet been convicted of anything). Compare them to the conditions you see in the film. Decide what

changes, if any, should take place and make a plan of action to address the needs. As an alternative, meet

with the families of people who are incarcerated and listen to their experiences and their needs. Discuss

ways your community could help meet those needs.

• Convene a screening of Give Up Tomorrow as part of a teach-in or debate on the proposition that the United

States should follow the example set by the Philippines and abolish the death penalty.

|30DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Father Reyes and fellow supporters at a run to

raise awareness around Paco's case.


FREE PACO NOW

http://freepaconow.com/case-documents

Advocates for Paco’s release have gathered documents

related to the case. Available in English and Spanish.

FAIR TRIALS INTERNATIONAL

www.fairtrials.net/cases/article/francisco_juan_larranaga_paco

This organization assists individuals accused of crimes who

are being held in foreign prisons and it helped to bring

Paco’s case before the United Nations Commission on

Human Rights.

REPRIEVE

http://www.reprieve.org.uk/cases/pacolarranaga

Reprieve uses the law to enforce the human rights of

prisoners, from death row to Guantánamo Bay. The group

investigates, litigates and educates, providing legal support

to prisoners unable to pay for it themselves. This page

provides information regarding the Larrañaga case.

Human Rights and the Death Penalty

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

www.amnesty.org/en/region/philippines/report-2012

For the current status of human rights in the Philippines,

access this report from Amnesty International. Also of

interest is the group’s information on abolishing the death

penalty (www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty) and its

petition in support of Paco (www.es.amnesty.org/

actua/acciones/filipinas-espanol-condenado-a-muerte/).

CHANGE.ORG

http://criminaljustice.change.org

Change.org is an online hub for social change that hosts

online communities for 20 major causes, including prison

reform. With a team of hundreds of writers and nonprofit

partners, it serves as a central platform for promoting

movements for social change on the Web. The section on

criminal justice provides information about broken prison

systems around the globe and how governments are

working to address the issue.

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

www.hrw.org/search/apachesolr_search/philippines

This link brings up current headlines related to human rights

in the Philippines on the group’s website. Search for the

term “death penalty” to see stories about current death

penalty cases across the globe.

RESOURCES

|31DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

FILMMAKER WEBSITE

www.pacodocu.com

The film’s official website includes video in Spanish, the filmmakers’ blog, an update on Paco and information

on the Free Paco Now campaign.

Original Online Content on POV To further enhance the broadcast, POV has produced an interactive website to enable viewers to explore the film

in greater depth. The Give Up Tomorrow website—www.pbs.org/pov/giveuptomorrow/—offers a streaming video

trailer for the film; a list of related websites, articles and books; a downloadable discussion guide; and special

features, including deleted scenes and updates on Paco’s case.

INNOCENCE PROJECT

www.innocenceproject.org

The Innocence Project is a national litigation and public

policy organization dedicated to exonerating wrongfully

convicted people through DNA testing and to reforming

the criminal justice system to prevent future injustice. Law

students handle case work while supervised by a team of

attorneys and staff.

PROCON.ORG

http://deathpenalty.procon.org

This site, which focuses on the United States, provides an

overview of the policy debate regarding the death penalty,

as well as information about the history of the death

penalty and its implementation. There are also links to

Amnesty International’s global reports on which nations still

carry out death sentences.

UNITED NATIONS OFFICE OF THE HIGH

COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

www.ohchr.org

On Larrañaga’s behalf, this office pressured the Philippine

government. The office’s website provides country-by-

country reports, as well as general information on human

rights.

RESOURCES

|32DISCUSSION GUIDE

Give Up Tomorrow

Thelma Chiong at a vigil with the Crusade Against Violence.


HOW TO BUY THE FILM

To order Give Up Tomorrow, go to www.shoppbs.org

The See it On PBS logo is a trademark of the Public Broadcasting Service and is used with permission. All rights reserved.

Produced by American Documentary, Inc.

and beginning its 25th season on PBS in

2012, the award-winning POV series is the

longest-running showcase on American television to feature

the work of today’s best independent documentary filmmakers.

Airing June through September with primetime specials during

the year, POV has brought more than 300 acclaimed documen-

taries to millions nationwide and has a Webby Award-winning

online series, POV’s Borders. Since 1988, POV has pioneered the

art of presentation and outreach using independent nonfiction

media to build new communities in conversation about today’s

most pressing social issues. Visit www.pbs.org/pov.

POV Digital www.pbs.org/pov

POV’s award-winning website extends the life of our films

online with interactive features, interviews, updates, video and

educational content, as well as listings for television

broadcasts, community screenings and films available online.

The POV Blog is a gathering place for documentary fans and

filmmakers to discuss their favorite films and get the latest

news.

POV Community Engagement and Education

www.pbs.org/pov/outreach

POV films can be seen at more than 450 events nationwide

every year. Together with schools, organizations and local PBS

stations, POV facilitates free community screenings and

produces free resources to accompany our films, including

discussion guides and curriculum-based lesson plans. With our

community partners, we inspire dialogue around the most

important social issues of our time.

Major funding for POV is provided by PBS, The John D. and

Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, National Endowment for

the Arts, The Educational Foundation of America, New York

State Council on the Arts, New York City Department of

Cultural Affairs, FACT and public television viewers. Funding

for POV's Diverse Voices Project is provided by the

Corporation for Public Broadcasting and The Andy Warhol

Foundation for the Visual Arts. Special support provided by the

Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. POV is

presented by a consortium of public television stations,

including KQED San Francisco, WGBH Boston and THIRTEEN

in association with WNET.ORG.

American Documentary, Inc. www.amdoc.org

American Documentary, Inc. (AmDoc) is a multimedia

company dedicated to creating, identifying, and presenting

contemporary stories that express opinions and perspectives

rarely featured in mainstream-media outlets. AmDoc is a

catalyst for public culture, developing collaborative strategic-

engagement activities around socially relevant content on

television, online, and in community settings. These activities

are designed to trigger action, from dialogue and feedback to

educational opportunities and community participation.

Front cover: Paco Larrañaga behind bars, being interviewed bya news reporter, shortly after he was arrested for the kidnap,rape and murder of two sisters in the Philippines.Photo courtesy of Arni Aclao

You can follow us on Twitter @POVengage for the latest news from

POV Community Engagement & Education.

25th Anniversary Partner: Media Sponsor:25th Anniversary Partner:

Documents

Human Rights Watch - PBSpov-tc.pbs.org/pov/downloads/2012/pov-giveuptomorrow-discussion... · City’s Lower East Side, and the letter brought me ... Paco in Manila—300 miles