0% found this document useful (0 votes)
67 views13 pages

Bontoc Arrest Warrant for Sexual Assault

This document is a memo of preliminary investigation from the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor in Bontoc regarding a case of sexual assault. It provides details of the complaint including the complainant, respondents, charges, date and location of the alleged crime. It also lists witnesses and notes that the investigation was initially on January 13th and postponed to January 16th.
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
67 views13 pages

Bontoc Arrest Warrant for Sexual Assault

This document is a memo of preliminary investigation from the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor in Bontoc regarding a case of sexual assault. It provides details of the complaint including the complainant, respondents, charges, date and location of the alleged crime. It also lists witnesses and notes that the investigation was initially on January 13th and postponed to January 16th.
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Republic of the Philippines

OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR


Bontoc

Related to: Not Related I.S. No. 001


I.S No. 001
Prosecutor ATTY. Ali Baba Prosecutor ATTY. Ali Baba
Date Filed January 14, 2019

MEMO OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

COMPLAINANT/S: RESPONDENT/S
1. Nancy Polyo 1. Police Corporal David Silly

Address: Calutit, Bontoc Mountain


Address: Calutit,Bontoc Mountain 2. Police Master Seargent Pandi Coco
Province
Adress: Eyeb, Bontoc Mountain Province

CHARGE: Sexual Assault

Place of Commission
Community Court in Bontoc Mountain Province

Date: January 13, 2019 Time: 8: 54 PM (Use back hereof for add,
accused) Witness:
Name Address
Kim Polyo Guinzadan MT. Province
Analyn Polyo Kalinga MT. Province

NOTE:1. Has a similar complaint been filed before any other office? (YES OR NO)
2. Is this complaint in the manner of a counter-affidavit? No (YES OR NO)
3. Are all the above information true and correct? YES (YES OR NO)

THE ABOVE SHOULD BE FILLED UP BY COMPLAINANT OR COUNSEL

Investigation on: January 13, 2019 Postpone to January 16. 2019


On relation of: Sexual Assault

Nancy Polyo
(Signature of complainant or counsel)
TAKE NOTE: Sufficient copies of the affidavit
*********************************************

Of complainant and witnesses and other ACTION TAKEN:


Supporting document should be submitted.
Degay, Reagan

Investigation Prosecutor

IMPORTANT!

A complainant shall be required to file his complaint in the form of an affidavit


to which must be appended affidavit of witnesses, annexes and other supporting
documents. The statements of the complainant and his witnesses, shall be, far as
practicable, be sworn to before the investigating Prosecutor. If sworn before any Officer
authorized to administer oaths, the administering Officer shall CERTIFY THAT HE
HAS PERSONALLY EXAMINED THE AFFIANT AND THAT HE VOLUNTARILY
EXECUTED AND UNDERSTOOD HIS AFFIDAVIT.

Late resolution given to Stenographer

Police Master Sergeant Pandi Coco Mr. Ethyl Love


Investigating Prosecutor Stenographer

Department of the Philippines


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
National Prosecution Service
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
Bontoc Mountain Province
Hall of Justice

RURAL BANK OF BONTOC NPS DOCKET NO. X-10-INV-14G-


00413 FOR: QUALIFIED THEFT THRU
FALSIFI-
Complainant; CATION OF PUBLIC/PRIVATE
reply-affidavit…………..pg. 1 of 3
DOCUMENTS

-versus-

KATHERINE SAN JUAN y


BELANO NISSA MAQUILING y
EROY JEANN LAWAT y ABELLA
Respondents.
/ /

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )


BONTOC MOUNTAIN PROVICE )
S.S. MUNICIPALITY OF BONTOC )

REPLY-
AFFIDAVIT
(Re. 22 October 2014 Counter-
Affidavit of Respondent Nissa E.
Maquiling)

COMES NOW COMPLAINANT, represented by the undersigned Bank Manager,


of legal age, Filipino, single and with residence address at c/o Rural Bank of
Bontoc
(Mountain Provinve),unto this Honorable Provincial Prosecutor, most
respectfully alleges, in Reply to the Counter- Affidavit of Respondent Nissa E.
Maquling, copy of which was actually received on 24 October 2014 through
courier LBC, that:

1) Conspiracy of the Respondent Nissa E. Maquiling is supported by


evidence and that absence of due diligence on the part of Respondent
Nissa E. Maquiling to deter the occurrence of losses due to the acts of
her subordinate Respondent Katherine Jane B. San Juan (then Teller)
having knowledge of the same is clearly an act of conspiring;

2) Needless to state that Respondent Nissa E. Maquiling has knowledge


of the anomalies of Respondent Katherine Jane B. San Juan when
she allowed on 29 October 2013 the use of a pre-signed withdrawal
slip to hide or conceal unaccounted amount or shortage;

3) Even if the use of a pre-signed withdrawal slip had the permission by


the account holder/s as alleged by Respondent Nissa E. Maquiling
cannot erase the illegal act she committed;

4) The letter of authorization from Flora Talam was belatedly made and
submitted after there was already a charge against Respondents
Nissa E. Maquiling, Jeann A. Lawat and Katherine Jane B. San Juan
and worst of it after the act of allowing to use a pre-signed withdrawal
slip had by this time transpired;

reply-affidavit…………..pg. 2 of 3
5) The letter of authorization of one Flora M. Talam was dated 08 October
2014 but was subscribed and sworn only on 17 October 2014 before
Repondent Nissa Maquiling’s counsel Atty. Annemarie Acosta-Quiros
recorded as Doc. No. 315; Page No. 63; Book No. 8 and Series of 2014
in her (Atty. Quiros) Notarial Register ;

6) Respondent Nissa E. Maquiling was not forced to pay the


P70,000.00 and that there was previous admission from her that she
was the one who have used or benefited the amount, which admission
gave the legal ground for the Complainant to demand payment of the
same. In addition, if and when she was not at fault then, she should
not allow herself to pay the amount;

7) That subsequent payment of Respondent Nissa E. Maquiling won’t


obliterate her criminal liability. In Aurora Tamayo vs. People of the
Philippines and Heirs of Pedro Sotto, G.R. No. 174698, July 28, 2008;
the Court ruled that; “xxx, subsequent payments of the accused does
not obliterate criminal liability”

AND SO, given and based on the above facts, most reputable witnesses,
and overwhelming evidences duly presented, it is respectfully prayed of the
Honorable Provincial Prosecutor that Respondent Nissa E. Maquiling together
with the other Respondents above-mentioned be held liable for Qualified Theft
thru Falsification of Public/Private Documents.

27 October 2014 at Bontoc Mountain Province, Philippines.

CATHERINE D. DAGAYLOAN
Affiant
For the Complainant Rural Bank
of Bontoc

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN, to before me on the date and place first-


above written, affiant declaring under oath that all the allegations in the
foregoing Reply- Affidavit are all true and correct. I hereby certify that I have
personally examined the affiant and I am satisfied that she voluntarily
executed and understood all the contents hereof.

Doc. No. ; ATTY DEGAY, REAGAN


Page No. ; Notary Public
Book No. ; Bontoc Mountain Province

Series of 2014 Roll No. 19302-IBP No. 268337

My commission expires on Dec. 31, 2015

reply-affidavit…………..pg. 3 of 3
Explanation:

Filing in Provincial Prosecutor Office and service to the adverse


counsel are done thru registered mail due to distance and impracticability of
personal service.

CATHERINE D. DAGAYLOAN

Copy furnished:

Atty. Annemarie Acosta-


Quiros Counsel for
Respondents

Bontoc, Mountain
Province
Republic of the
Philippines
Department of
Justice
NATIONAL PROSECUTION
SERVICE OFFICE OF THE
PROVINCIAL
PROSECUTOR
MountainProvi
nce

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,


Complainant,

‐versus‐ NPS NO. VIII‐09d‐INV‐110‐


00230

ERICSON ACOSTA,
For: ILLEGAL
POSSESSION OF
Accused EXPLOSIVES

Accused
x‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
‐‐x

COUNTER
AFFIDAVIT

I, ERICSON ACOSTA, of legal age, married, and a resident of eyeb, Bontoc


Mountain Province, after being duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and
state that:

1. I am a Freelance Journalist doing research on Human Rights violations and the


protection of the environment in Bontoc for the Alliance of Concerned Samareños (ACOS) an
Copies of some of my Research Works and Articles are hereto attached.

2. On February 13, 2011, having just completed my research task the previous day, I
left the village center of Barangay Samoki, Bontoc at a little past 9 o’ clock in the morning,
and headed for what the barrio folk call their “port” – an unmarked quay by the river which
was less than an hour’s walk via mountain trail, where a pump boat was scheduled to pick
me up at the said place and bring me to Talubin

3. I was joined by Vicente Dacles, the Barangay Secretary, and several other residents
of samoki who were all going to town as well for some business.

4. Dacles was at the head of our pack, followed closely by myself, while the rest, who
were mostly women and children, were falling behind by at least a hundred meters.

5. At around 10:00 am, as we were just some 200 meters away from our destination,
we caught sight of a platoon of soldiers who motioned us (Dacles and myself) to stop. I at
once noticed that the soldiers were resting and cooking by the left side of the trail.

6. One of them approached us alertly and asked where we came from and where we
were going. Dacles said that we came from the village and that a pump boat was waiting for
us nearby as we were headed for town.

7. The soldier then inquired if we knew where they could fetch water. Dacles
turned around and pointed to an area somewhere, and gave the soldier brief directions on
how to get there. He even added that if it became difficult to locate, the soldier could just ask
the rest of our company who were lagging behind. The soldier then told us to carry on, and
so we did.

8. Barely a minute after we had started walking again, another group of soldiers
(this time merely a team) had appeared in front of us. One soldier asked the same
questions – where did we come from? Where were we going? Dacles simply repeated
the answers he gave earlier.

9. Dacles also told the soldier that we had already passed through the main body of
the platoon and had in fact given the soldiers there directions where to get drinking water.
The soldier told us we can go.

10. But just as we were turning our backs to him, the soldier again ordered us to
halt. He was intently eyeing the mini‐knapsack that I was carrying. He said: “Ano ‘yang
nasa bag mo?”
11. Before I could even reply, the soldier, in brisk movements, had un‐slung the
knapsack from my shoulders and had zipped it open. It was my computer notebook and
some other complimentary gadgets he found inside my mini‐knapsack.

12. The soldier was quite surprised by what he saw. “Nasa bundok ka tapos may
laptop ka?” the soldier said.

13. The soldier and his team led us quickly back to where the main body of the
platoon was. There the soldiers took turns doing body search on me. They emptied my
pockets and my sling pouch; they checked my sides, ran their hands through every part of
my body and lifted the hem of my shirt up to my neck looking for concealed weapons. They
did not find any.

14. One soldier handed me my computer and told me to turn it on. I told them that
the batteries had already drained out. I pressed the power button to show them that the
computer won’t boot. But another soldier scolded me for pressing the button saying that I
might have consciously and slyly triggered the computer to self‐destruct.

15. Then the soldiers, five to seven of them at a time, started to harangue me almost
in unison, with raised voices and intermittent invectives and threats. They said: “NPA ka!
Mataas siguro ranggo mo kaya ka may laptop! Mag‐ingat ka sa mga kilos mo baka makatikim
ka! Huwag kang tumakbo! Ayusin mo ang mga sagot mo kung ayaw mong masaktan!”

16. I tried to explain to them that I was doing research in the area but whatever
I said was drowned it seemed by their intense excitement to badger and harass me.

17. Lucero then asked if it were legally possible to hand me back to the military as he
had a few hours earlier been briefed by the colonel that the 8th ID was willing to take me in
under some special custodial arrangements. It was here that I decided to intervene. I made
sure that my voice was loud and clear for all the employees in that big office to hear. I stood
up and said that the idea was highly irregular and definitely illegal. I then drew their
attention towards the colonel and his men by pointing at their group while saying that these
men in civilian clothes were the soldiers and officers who illegally arrested me and are now
my complainants, and I would never allow them to take me into custody.

18. I heard a lady employee remark, “Ah, mga sundalo pala sila!” and I saw the
approving, sympathetic glances and gestures of some of the employees. Then one employee
told Lucero that I could not be brought back to the military and the best alternative was to
bring me to the sub‐provincial jail.

19. Then I said, in the same loud and clear voice that someone should tell Lucero that
I’m entitled to a phone call, a right that the San Jorge PNP deprived of me despite my pleas
and despite the very critical situation that my family was in faraway Metro Manila. Another
employee told Lucero that, yes, the San Jorge PNP should have allowed me to call my family.
The employee, sensing that I still had more issues to present, told Lucero to bring me to the
Public Attorney’s Office (PAO).

20. At the PAO, I mentioned to one of the lawyers that I might need the service of one
of their attorneys especially because I have yet to contact my family and my private lawyer
thanks to the police and the military’s complete disregard of my rights. The colonel, as if
trying to wash his hands, stood up and announced that he’s willing to let me use his phone. I
said OK, so the colonel and I left the PAO and went outside the Hall of Justice.

21. Outside the Hall of Justice, the colonel gave me his phone and I was able to
contact my mother. But just as I was giving my mother the details of my situation, the
colonel told me to end the call. He took his phone and left with his men.

22. After this the San Jorge policemen brought me to the sub‐provincial jail
where I was remitted around 1:30 p.m.

23. I later learned that a Complaint for Illegal Possession of Explosives was filed
against me before the Regional Trial Court of Calbayog City at 10:30 a.m. of February 16,
2011 or seventy two (72) hours and thirty (30) minutes after my arrest on February 13, 2011
at 10:00 a.m.

24. I vehemently deny that “the hand grenade” was confiscated in my possession or
under my control, but was in truth only planted by the military who arrested me.

25. In my arrest and continued detention, my constitutional and human rights were
violated. To summarize:

a. I was arrested without warrant while not committing any crime or doing anything
illegal;
b. I was not informed of the reason for my arrest at the time of my arrest;
c. I was denied the right to counsel;
d. I was denied a phone call and prevented from contacting my family or my lawyer;
e. I was subjected to prolonged interrogation for 44 hours;
f. During tactical interrogation, I was physically and psychologically tortured;
g. I was deprived of sleep, threatened, intimidated, coerced and forced to admit
membership in the NPA;
h. The evidence against me, “the grenade”, was planted;
i. The complaint against me was filed in court only after 72 hours and 30
minutes after my arrest; and,
j. I was detained in a military camp, which is not of civilian jurisdiction.

k. This Counter Affidavit is being executed to attest to the truth of all the
foregoing facts and events and to disclaim all the accusations against me.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature on this 11 th day


of April, 2011 at Calbayog City.

ERICSON ACOSTA (sgd.)

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 11th day of April, 2011 at


Bontoc.

I hereby CERTIFY that I have personally examined the affiant and that I am
satisfied that he has voluntarily executed and understood his Counter‐Affidavit.

AGUSTIN M. AVALON (sgd.)

Asst. Prov. Prosecutor


Republic of the Philippines

Department of Justice

National Prosecution Service

OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR

BONTOC

AFFIDAVIT OF DESISTANCE

WE, ROSE VINEGAR and PRESCA TUNA, Filipinos, of legal ages, husband and wife, respectively, and
residents of Calutit, Bontoc Mountain Province after having been duly sworn to in accordance with law,
depose and state:

1. We are the private complainant in a criminal case for Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Damage to
Property against SILVER SWAN at the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor, Bontoc.

2. In this regard, the accused has already paid the damage to our vehicle;

3. In view of the payment by the accused and considering that PRESCA TUNA was not injured, we would
like to manifest that we now completely and absolutely exonerate the accused from any liability in
connection with the above-mentioned criminal case and that we are no longer interested, and we
hereby desist, in prosecuting the said criminal case;

4. As such, we respectfully pray that the aforementioned case against SILVER SWAN be withdrawn
and/or dismissed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this 14 th of January 2021 in Bontoc Mountain
Province, Philippines.

ROSE VINEGAR

Affiant

Issued at: Bontoc, Mountain Province

Issued on: Janury 14, 2021

PRESCA TUNA

Affiant

Issued at: Bontoc, Mountain Province

Issued on: January 14, 2021

SUBCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 14 th of January 2021 in Bontoc Mountain Province,
Philippines, affiants exhibits to me their valid proofs of identification.

Common questions

Powered by AI

Affidavits serve as foundational documents for the justice process, providing sworn statements of facts from involved parties, which guide preliminary investigations and decisions on whether to pursue a case. In the sources, affidavits were used to articulate claims and defenses in cases of sexual assault, theft, and illegal possession of explosives . They bridge testimonial gaps and offer structured accounts necessary for prosecutors to evaluate potential violations of law. The integrity and thorough examination of these affidavits ensure that justice is properly served by grounding legal actions in well-substantiated claims.

Personal affidavits are vital in the Philippine legal system as they provide sworn statements that detail the involved parties' claims or defenses. In the case of Ericson Acosta, his counter-affidavit was crucial for asserting his truth against accusations of illegal possession of explosives. It documented his claims of rights violations, including unwarranted arrest, lack of due process, and implantation of evidence by the military . This affidavit aimed to refute charges and assert his innocence, demonstrating the affidavit’s role in protecting individuals’ rights and ensuring fair trial processes.

Lessons from the Bontoc legal cases highlight the necessity of balancing individual rights with effective enforcement. The cases illustrate the dangers of prioritizing enforcement at the expense of due process, such as unlawful arrests and evidence planting as seen in Ericson Acosta’s detention . These actions can infringe on human rights and diminish public trust. Conversely, the procedural integrity in cases like the sexual assault complaint and qualified theft show that upon respecting due process, equitable justice can be pursued. These examples underscore maintaining legal safeguards to protect rights while ensuring that justice is served efficiently and effectively.

Conceding payment after a charge has been filed, as seen in Nissa E. Maquiling's case, does not absolve criminal liability. Although paying the amount could be interpreted as an admission of culpability or an effort to mitigate consequences, it does not negate the legal implications of the alleged crime . As highlighted, subsequent payments do not erase criminal liability, as demonstrated by the precedent set in Aurora Tamayo vs. People of the Philippines. This establishes that financial restitution may affect sentencing but not the determination of guilt.

Supporting documents play a crucial role in preliminary investigations, as they substantiate claims and provide material evidence for legal proceedings. In the Bontoc sexual assault case involving Nancy Polyo, the preliminary investigation necessitated affidavits from complainants and witnesses, alongside other documents, to verify and corroborate the allegations . These documents are essential for the prosecutor to determine probable cause, facilitating informed decisions on whether to pursue prosecution or dismiss the case. Inaccurate or incomplete documentation could hinder justice, highlighting their importance in legal processes.

Allegations of evidence tampering, as in Ericson Acosta's detention, severely undermine public trust in the justice system. Such accusations suggest manipulation of facts to frame individuals unjustly, challenging the integrity of legal institutions responsible for enforcing laws . These practices erode confidence in objective and fair legal processes, fostering skepticism and fear among the public that justice isn't equally administered. As individuals become wary of unjust practices, the justice system's credibility is damaged, necessitating reforms to restore faith through transparency and accountability mechanisms.

The military's actions during Ericson Acosta's arrest negatively reflect on the enforcement of human rights laws in the Philippines. Acosta claimed he was subject to warrantless arrest, illegal detention, and abuse during interrogation, which violated his constitutional rights . The military’s alleged planting of evidence and denial of legal counsel further highlights systemic issues in enforcing human rights laws, indicating a gap between legislation and practice. These actions can tarnish the country's human rights record, raising concerns about the protection of civil liberties and the accountability of military conduct.

Procedural delays can significantly impact the upholding of justice, as seen in the case against Nissa E. Maquiling. The delayed submission and acknowledgment of crucial documents, such as the pre-signed withdrawal slip and the letter of authorization, may affect the timely resolution of the case . These delays can lead to prolonged uncertainty and potential prejudice against the respondent, hampering the swift delivery of justice for both the complainant and the respondent. Such procedural inefficiencies undermine trust in the legal process.

Counter-affidavits are strategically used by respondents in the Philippine legal system to formally rebuke allegations and present alternative narratives. In Nissa E. Maquiling's case, the counter-affidavit aimed to counter the accusations of involvement in qualified theft through evidence and testimonial discrepancies . This document serves as the respondent's primary means to challenge the complainant's assertions, introduce exculpatory evidence, and prevent presumptive guilt without trial. Its strategic use is essential in balancing the legal discourse and ensuring that all sides are fairly represented before judicial proceedings commence.

The principle of presumption of innocence, a fundamental right ensuring that a defendant is considered innocent until proven guilty, is challenged in the sexual assault allegations involving Nancy Polyo against Police Corporal David Silly and Police Master Sergeant Pandi Coco. The preliminary investigation aims to determine the credibility and sufficiency of evidence before any arrest or formal charge occurs . However, variables such as public perception, the seriousness of the charge, and the roles of law enforcement officers can overshadow this principle, sometimes leading to prejudgment without sufficient legal proceedings.

You might also like