Vic Sotto on legal battle vs Darryl Yap: ‘I have a clean conscience’

Vic Sotto amid legal battle vs Darryl Yap: ‘I have a clean conscience’

/ 08:53 PM January 14, 2025

Vic Sotto amid legal battle vs Darryl Yap: ‘I have a clean conscience’. Images: Hannah Mallorca/INQUIRER.net, Facebook/Darryl Yap

(From left) Vic Sotto and Darryl Yap. Images: Hannah Mallorca/INQUIRER.net, Facebook/Darryl Yap

Don’t expect Vic Sotto to dwell too much on his ongoing legal battle with director-screenwriter Darryl Yap even as a gag order was issued by the Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court on his habeas data petition.

The Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 205 issued a gag order on Sotto and Yap’s camps on Monday, January 13, prohibiting both parties from disclosing information about the ongoing case related to the upcoming movie “The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma,” which is supposedly based on the life of the late ’80s sexy star.

Article continues after this advertisement

The urgent motion for a gag order was filed by Yap’s legal counsel, Atty. Raymond Fortun, on Saturday, January 11, before the trial court handling Sotto’s habeas data petition.

FEATURED STORIES

Amid the ongoing legal battle, Sotto was quite chill when he spoke with reporters on the sidelines of a barley drink launch in Quezon City on Tuesday, January 14. “I’m good. I’m relaxed. Just going with the flow. For me, I trust in God,” he said.

“Because I have a clean conscience. Malinis ang pakiramdam ko. Wala naman dapat ika-worry. Mai-istress ka lang kapag iniisip mo,” he further said. (My feeling is clear. There’s nothing to worry about. You’ll only stress if you think about it.)

Article continues after this advertisement

Sotto said his personal mantra is simply to go over these drawbacks, but not to dwell on them.

Article continues after this advertisement

“Daanan mo lang nang daanan. Iisa lang naman ang pupuntahan natin. Basta derecho ang daan. ‘Yun naman ang importante. Bawal ang paliko-liko, basta derecho lang ang daan,” he said.

Article continues after this advertisement

(Just keep going forward. We’re heading to just one place. As long as the road is straight, that’s what’s important. No detours, just keep going straight.)

But when Sotto was asked further if he was willing to settle his legal battle with Yap beyond the court, he said: “I cannot talk about that, sorry.”

Article continues after this advertisement

The actor-comedian said he appreciates the support of his family, and friends, especially his wife Pauleen Luna, who leads his steady support system.

“Of course, I appreciate [the support from] my wife, my family, my children, ang aking mga kaibigan. Maraming salamat. Sila ang nagbibigay ng lakas ng loob sa’kin (Thank you very much. They’re the ones who give me strength),” he said.

Touching on his close bond with his brother Senate reelectionist Vicente “Tito” Sotto III and co-host Joey de Leon, he said that they, too, would go “all out” in supporting him

“All-out support. Kahit anong mangyari, sama-sama kami,” he said. “Ako talaga si relax lang eh, hindi ko masyadong pinoproblema ang mga problema. Hindi tayo bibigyan ng problema ng Panginoon kung hindi kayang ayusin.”

(All-out support. No matter what happens, we’re together. I’m just relaxed. I don’t really worry about the problem. The Lord will not give us anything we cannot handle.)

In her three-page order, Muntinlupa RTC Branch 205 Judge Liezel Aquiatan directed Sotto and Yap to refrain from disclosing any information about their legal battle, citing the sub judice rule.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

“All parties are DIRECTED to observe strict confidentiality in compliance with the sub judice rule, ensuring that the case proceedings and any related matters remain undisclosed to the public until resolved,” it stated.

“The Court finds merit in the motion of the respondent (Yap). Further, the Court can broaden the scope of the gag order to prohibit all parties and their counsel from making public comments about the merits of the case that could influence the court or the outcome of the case. The lawyers’ statements may cause to misrepresent the Court’s orders and could prejudice public perception. Ultimately, the Court’s priority would be to protect the fair administration of justice and prevent undue influence on the judicial processes,” the order further added.

TAGS: Darryl Yap, Pepsi Paloma, Vic Sotto

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2025 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.