Rizal defended himself against 15 pieces of evidence presented against him, including letters and poems. He argued that he was not involved in any revolutionary activities during his exile in Dapitan from 1892-1896, and that the Katipunan used his name without his permission. He maintained that the La Liga Filipina, which he helped establish, was a civic organization, not a revolutionary group. Rizal argued that if he was truly guilty, he would not have remained in the country or established institutions in Dapitan.

2. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
Preliminary
Investigation
Two kinds of evidence presented
against Rizal:
 Documentary
 Testimonial

3. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
1. A letter from Antonio Luna to
Mariano Ponce dated Oct. 16,
1888, Madrid.
2. A letter of Rizal to his family dated
Aug. 20, 1890, Madrid.
3. A letter from M.H. Del Pilar to
Deodato Arellano dated Jan 7,
1889, Madrid
4. A poem entitled “Kundiman”
allegedly written by Rizal.

4. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
Tunay ngayong umid yaring dila't puso
Sinta'y umiilag, tuwa'y lumalayo,
Bayan palibhasa'y lupig at sumuko
Sa kapabayaan ng nagturong puno.
Datapuwa't muling sisikat ang araw,
Pilit maliligtas ang inaping bayan,
Magbabalik mandin at muling iiral
Ang ngalang Tagalog sa sandaigdigan.
Ibubuhos namin ang dugo't babaha
Matubos nga lamang ang sa amang lupa
Habang di ninilang panahong tadhana,
Sinta'y tatahimik, iidlip ang nasa.

5. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
5. A letter of Carlos Oliver to an
unidentified person, Sept. 18, 1891.
6. A Masonic document dated Feb. 9, 1892.
7. A letter signed “Dimasalang” to Ten Luz
(Juan Zulueta) dated May 24, 1892, H.K.
8. A letter signed Dimasalang to
unidentified committee dated June 1,
1892, Hong Kong.

6. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
9. An anonymous and undated letter to the
Editor of the Hong Kong Telegraph.
10. A letter of Ildefonso Laurel to Rizal,
dated Sept. 3, 1892.
11. A letter of Rizal Segundo, dated Sept.
17, 1893.
12. A letter to M.H. Del Pilar to Juan A.
Tenluz

7. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
13. A transcript of the speech of Pinkian
(Emilio Jacinto) in a meeting of the
Katipunan on July 23, 1893.
14. Transcript of a speech Tik-Tol (Jose
Turiano Santiago) during the same
Katipunan meeting.
15. A poem by Laon Laan (Rizal) entitled A
Talisay.

8. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
1. Martin Constantino
2. Aguedo del Rosario
3. Jose Reyes
4. Moises Salvador
5. Jose Dizon
6. Pio Valenzuela
7. Ambrosio Savador
8. Francisco Quison
9. Timoteo Paez
10. Deodato Arellano
11. Pedro Serrano Laktaw
12. Antonio Salazar
13. Domingo Franco

9. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
 Lt. Luis Taviel de Andrade
 1st Lieutenant of the Artillery, brother of Jose
Taviel de Andrade, the bodyguard of Rizal.

10. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
 December 11, 1896
 Charged with the crime of rebellion, and the
formation of illegal associations.
 Rizal replied that:
 He does not question the jurisdiction of the court
 He has nothing to amend except that during his
exile in Dapitan in 1892, he had not dealt in
political matters;
 He has nothing to admit on the charges against
him
 He had nothing to admit on the declarations of
the witnesses, he had not met nor knew, against
him.

11. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
 While in Detention
 Rizal released a manifesto that he
denounces the revolution and condemned
Katipunan for using his name without his
permission.

12. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
December 26, 1896
 @Hall of Banners of the Cuartel de
España
 He was accused of 3 crimes: rebellion,
sedition, illegal associations.
 Penalty: Life imprisonment-death for
rebellion and sedition, correctional
imprisonment and a fine of 325 to 3250
pesetas for illegal association.

13. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
As testified by Pio Valenzuela, Rizal was
against rebellion
 He had not written a letter addressed to
the Katipunan comprising revolutionary
elements
Without his knowledge, his name was
used by the Katipunan; if he really was
guilty, he could have escaped while he
was in Singapore

14. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
 If he was guilty, he should have left the
country while in exile; he shouldn't have
built a home, bought a parcel of land or
established a hospital in Dapitan.
 If he was really the leader of the revolution,
the revolutionists should have consulted him.
 He did not deny that he wrote the by-laws of
the La Liga Filipina, but to make things clear,
the organization was a civic association, not
a revolutionary society.

15. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
 If he was guilty, he should have left the
country while in exile; he shouldn't have
built a home, bought a parcel of land or
established a hospital in Dapitan.
 If he was really the leader of the revolution,
the revolutionists should have consulted him.
 He did not deny that he wrote the by-laws of
the La Liga Filipina, but to make things clear,
the organization was a civic association, not
a revolutionary society.

16. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
 After the first meeting of La Liga, the
association banished because of his exile in
Dapitan, thus, did not last long.
 If the La Liga was reorganized nine months
later, he had no idea about it
 If the La Liga had a revolutionary purpose,
then Katipunan should not have been
organized.

17. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
 If the Spanish authorities found his letters
having bitter atmosphere, it was because in
1890 his family was being persecuted
resulting to their dispossession of properties
and deportation of all his brothers-in-law.
 He lived an exemplary life in Dapitan – the
politico-military commanders and missionary
priests in the province could attest to that.

18. RIZAL ‘S DEFENSE
 If according to witnesses the speech he
delivered at Doroteo Ongjunco's house had
inspired the revolution, then he want to
confront these persons. If he really was for
the revolution, then why did the Katipunan
sent an unfamiliar emissary to him in
Dapitan? It is so because all his friends were
aware that he never advocated violence.