Andres Bonifacio

Makapagal on his narrative, never reffered to Andres Bonifacio as the Supremo, but he
knew that the man he was ordered to kill was the founder of the Katipunan, the organization
whose ideals he was fighting forOne of the biases evident in his account is how he elevates
himself by pointing out how he couldn't do anything and attempting to imply that he is regretful
for killing Andres Bonifacio and his brother. Though it is understandable that he felt sorry for
him, it seemed as though he was trying to convey his sympathies for the Supremo of Katipunan.
As I have said, it is hard to believe something that has many versions and on top that, there are
no witnesses that can affirm or deny this. It is easy to create a story especially when it includes
an "I am the only survivor of the occurrence" and the likes. He was killed in a secluded place
away from the now hallowed field where Rizal was felled. The second bias can be found in
Macapagal’s account is And the fact that Andres and his brother were killed in a secluded place
makes it easy to create a story because there are no witnesses that can affirm or deny this.