And so it has come to pass.
The Sereno story, one that we have been following since her celebrated and, well, controversial appointment in 2012, has reached its conclusion by a High Court vote of 8-6.
What the unprecedented decision shows is that wrongdoing, especially the admitted ones, cannot be covered up by the mere technicality which her supporters seek to silence the quo warranto petition.
Had she won the vote, the discovery of serious wrongdoing and integrity issues surrounding her appointment and performance, and her decision to play politics to keep her position would have left a bad taste in the mouth, even more distasteful than the ouster of her predecessor on roughly the same grounds: the SALN.
Had she won, the protests by court employees and the legion of dissatisfied citizens would have grown louder, and the subsequent decisions she would pen would be read with suspicion, not inconceivably in light of the political colors she may be wearing.
But, thankfully, she did not.
In its wake, a lesson may be learnt for others like her who think they can use public opinion, political opposition, and yes, even social media to sway judicial processes and decisions. But the greater lesson may be this: that the impact of Sereno's folly ought not to be lost on us, the people, who must ascertain that only those with clean hands be accepted as magistrates, and that no supreme Court Justice should ever be accused of rising to that exalted position because of political patronage, or sustain tenure despite false pretense or confessed infractions.