technically, this argument has already been rebutted by defense in the appeal. junk and throwaways had been discarded by the liews, and the maid was supposed to dispose of them, but she kept some as they seemed to be ok with her. that’s not taking items without permission; she became responsible for the disposal of trash and discarded items, thus she could recycle discarded items at will. it’s pointless for diehards and buaykuayans in the spf and agc to double down on their vindictiveness post-appeal, after all the details, arguments, and counter-arguments had been exhaustively examined in court. if they wish to counter now, it’s too late as they had their opportunities in the lengthy appeal hearing process. what a bunch of bozos and childish morons resorting to social media to continue to argue the case.