Dissecting the Controversy: Why Reports of Atty. Lorna Kapunan’s Alleged Withdrawal from Atong Ang’s Legal Team Are Provably False and Dangerous

Introduction

When rumors spread rapidly in today’s hyperconnected digital age, they often leave a trail of confusion, reputational damage, and misinformed public discourse. Such is the case with the recent viral claim that Atty. Lorna Kapunan had resigned from representing businessman Charlie “Atong” Ang in the high-profile investigation surrounding the disappearance of multiple cockfighting aficionados, popularly referred to as the “missing sabungeros” case.

This claim emerged just as Ang and his legal team filed multiple countercharges against whistleblowers who had implicated him and actress Gretchen Barretto in a series of shocking allegations. What began as unverified social media posts soon ballooned into widespread speculation, prompting the legal team to issue a strong and immediate denial.

In this article, we dissect the origin, timing, and strategic implications of the rumor, examine the larger case, and provide a contextualized profile of Atty. Kapunan to understand why her alleged resignation is not only untrue but also highly implausible.

1. The Origins of a Dangerous Rumor

Sometime in early July 2025, posts began circulating on Facebook, TikTok, and in private messaging groups suggesting that Atty. Kapunan had “stepped down” from defending Atong Ang. The message spread through vague references and screenshots of unverified chat threads. There were no official statements, no press releases, and no court documents supporting the claim.

Interestingly, the rumor appeared shortly after Atty. Kapunan and her client were seen in public filing a series of criminal complaints against two whistleblowers. This context makes the timing of the rumor suspicious. It wasn’t based on facts or sourced from verified reports, yet it gained momentum among netizens eager for dramatic developments in the case.

2. Legal Team’s Swift Denial

Faced with the viral spread of the story, the legal camp representing Atong Ang moved quickly to debunk the rumor. They publicly reaffirmed Atty. Kapunan’s role as lead counsel, stating that she remained fully committed to defending her client. In legal circles, silence can be interpreted as tacit admission—so the speed and clarity of the response carried weight.

Not only was there no resignation, but Atty. Kapunan had, just days earlier, appeared at a press conference standing beside her client while filing multiple legal actions against the whistleblowers. Her name was on the official complaints. Her signature was present. Her appearance was documented.

If a resignation were to happen, it would typically involve formal withdrawal from court, a filing of motion to withdraw legal representation, and often a clear statement to the public. None of this occurred. The rumor, therefore, had no procedural or evidentiary support.

3. Case Context: The Disappearance of the Sabungeros

To understand the potential impact of the rumor, one must first understand the gravity of the case it attempts to affect.

Over the past few years, the Philippines has been gripped by a disturbing mystery: the disappearance of more than 30 individuals associated with online cockfighting operations. Dubbed the “missing sabungeros” case, the victims vanished without a trace from cockpits and farm locations, sparking national outrage and prompting investigations from law enforcement and Congress alike.

In June 2025, the case exploded back into public attention after two former associates of Atong Ang—Julie “Dondon” Patidongan and Alan Bantiles—came forward with serious allegations. They claimed that Ang was behind the disappearances, and that the bodies of the victims were dumped in Taal Lake. These were not vague accusations; they named individuals, described operations, and suggested a network of conspirators.

4. Atty. Kapunan and the Legal Counteroffensive

Following these allegations, Atty. Kapunan took the offensive. Representing Atong Ang, she helped file five criminal complaints against the whistleblowers, charging them with attempted extortion, grave threats, slander, grave coercion, and more. The legal strategy appeared clear: discredit the accusers and prove that their testimonies were part of a coordinated attempt to extract money from Ang in exchange for silence.

Kapunan herself spoke with poise and assertiveness during a press briefing, calling the allegations “a lie” and branding the whistleblowers as individuals seeking to manipulate public sympathy for financial gain. She presented the extortion attempt as real and dangerous, painting the accusers as former employees with an agenda.

Given this level of involvement and strategic direction, the idea that she would suddenly “resign” makes little sense. Legal professionals—especially those of Kapunan’s stature—do not simply abandon clients at the height of legal warfare unless compelled by extraordinary circumstances. No such circumstances have been presented or documented.

5. Why the Resignation Claim Doesn’t Hold Up

5.1 There Was No Official Filing

In legal proceedings, a lawyer cannot simply “walk away” from a case. If they are lead counsel, they must file a formal motion to withdraw legal representation and receive court approval. There is no such filing. The absence of such a basic procedural step alone debunks the claim.

5.2 Public Appearances Suggest Continuity

The last verified appearance of Atty. Kapunan alongside her client occurred during the filing of the criminal complaints—a major legal step. Her role was neither silent nor symbolic; she was the face and voice of the legal campaign.

5.3 Timing and Political Optics

The fact that the resignation rumor surfaced shortly after this very public filing is unlikely to be coincidental. In many political or criminal cases, undermining the legal team can serve as a strategy to sow discord and weaken the defense. Suggesting that the lead counsel “abandoned ship” plants the idea that the case is collapsing from within.

6. The Role of Disinformation in Legal Cases

This episode highlights a broader issue: how misinformation can be weaponized in high-profile legal proceedings. The use of social media to disseminate unsupported claims allows unverified narratives to shape public perception before courts have had their say.

In the digital landscape, allegations travel faster than corrections. Even when rumors are proven false, they can have lasting effects on how a person or case is perceived. In this instance, the fake news about Kapunan’s resignation might have succeeded, albeit briefly, in portraying Atong Ang’s legal defense as unstable or unraveling.

The legal team’s denial came fast, but the damage had already started circulating. In complex legal battles involving multiple allegations, media pressure, and political scrutiny, public trust becomes an additional front of the war.

7. Who Is Atty. Lorna Kapunan?

Atty. Kapunan is one of the most well-known legal personalities in the Philippines. She has built a career representing high-stakes, high-visibility cases that often attract national attention. Her clients have ranged from political figures and celebrities to corporations and private individuals facing sensitive charges.

Notably, she once served as legal counsel to Janet Lim-Napoles in a now-infamous illegal detention case, later stepping away from that case due to differences in strategy. But in that case, as in all others, her departure followed formal protocols and was publicly documented.

She is known for being articulate, assertive, and meticulous in her legal methods. Her continued presence in the Atong Ang case suggests that she views it as a winnable fight—and that her client’s defense deserves a full-throttle legal effort.

8. Legal and Public Implications Moving Forward

8.1 The Investigation Will Intensify

The Department of Justice has already classified Atong Ang and Gretchen Barretto as suspects. With witness testimonies on record and new forensic efforts underway, including searches in Taal Lake, the investigation will likely expand in scope and scale.

8.2 The Defense Strategy Is Becoming Clearer

By accusing the whistleblowers of extortion and defamation, the defense is positioning Ang as a victim of opportunistic actors rather than as a mastermind of any crime. Kapunan’s leadership suggests that this narrative will be sustained in upcoming court battles.

8.3 Public Opinion Remains Divided

While some sympathize with the families of the missing sabungeros and demand justice, others express skepticism over the motivations behind the witness statements. In such a polarized environment, the integrity of the legal process must be preserved.

Conclusion

The claim that Atty. Lorna Kapunan resigned from defending Atong Ang is not only false—it is provably so. Her public presence, legal filings, and official statements all point to her continued leadership of Ang’s legal defense. The rumor appears to be a calculated attempt to disrupt the narrative and weaken the defense team’s credibility.

As the case continues to unfold, the focus must remain on evidence, due process, and the truth. Whether Atong Ang is guilty or innocent is a question for the courts. But what is already clear is that misinformation, particularly when unchecked, poses a real threat to justice—not just for Ang and his legal team, but for everyone involved, including the families of the missing men.

📚 Related Articles for Further Reading

“Atong Ang Files Multiple Criminal Complaints Against Whistleblowers in Missing Sabungeros Case” – Brigada News
“DOJ Declares Atong Ang and Gretchen Barretto

as Suspects in High-Profile Disappearance Case” – Manila Standard

“Search Continues in Taal Lake for Remains Linked to Missing Cockfighters” – ABS-CBN News
“Whistleblower Accuses Businessman of Mass Killings in E-Sabong Operation” – GMA News
“Atty. Lorna Kapunan Denies Resignation, Remains Committed to Atong Ang’s Defense” – Philippine Daily Inquirer