REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

Third Judicial Region

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 16
City of Malolos

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

Plaintif

versus CRIMINAL CASE NO. 6409-M-

2017
FOR: Viol. Of Section 5 (i) of RA
9165

RENATO SAN JUAN

Accused
XX---------------------------------------------------------XX

COMMENT/OBJECTIONS

(To the Prosecution’s Formal Offer of Object and Documentary

Evidence)

ACCUSED by the undersigned counsel and unto this Honorable

Court, most respectfully comments and/or objects to the admission
of the Prosecution’s Formal Offer of Object Evidence as follows:

ACCUSED objects to the formal offer of the Faithful

Reproduction of Decision of Municipal Trial Court of Balagtas Bulacan
in the Concubinage case filed by the Private Complainant against
the accused and his paramour, marked as Exhibit “P”. The same has
no probative value since it is not a element of the crime more
specifically in Violation of Section (5i) of R.A 9165. There is no basis
for its admissibility thus making its purpose moot and unwarranted.

The ACCUSED further objects to the purpose of the offer as

follows:

EXHIBITS DESCRIPTION
COMMENTS/OBJECTIONS

Page 1 of 4
“B” to Affidavit of Ms. May The Accused objects to the
“B-6” Lenn San Juan purpose of the offer specifically
Bautista and Renz which is to attest to the incident
Marion San Juan pertaining to the violation of
Section (5i) of R A 9165 by the
accused.

Furthermore, the Affidavit of

Renz Marion San Juan should not
be admitted for the latter was
not presented to attest to his
Affidavit. Thus, the testimony of
the witness with regard to this
matter would all be hearsay and
is inadmissible as evidence.

At cross, of the witness, Ms. Lenn

San Juan Bautista, she
categorically admitted that she
did not report any incident of
physical and verbal abuse of the
accused upon her mother, the
Complainant even though she
declared that it happened in
numerous occasions. Her failure
to report the same with the
proper authorities for immediate
action raise doubt as to its
truthfulness..

“H” Pagpapatunay issued The Accused objects to the

by the Office of purpose of the offer specifically
Barangay Santol which is to establish that the
dated 17 of April accused violated Section (5i) of R
2017. A 9165.

The testimony of the Barangay

Chairman of Santol, Balagtas,
Bulacan was speculative and no
probative value.

The Accused also objects to the

purpose of the offer which is to
establish the circumstances
surrounding the violation of

Page 2 of 4

“J TO “J- Records of Barangay
3” Blotter of Barangay
Santol, Balagtas,
Bulacan dated March
6, 2017, March 9,
2017, March 23, 2017
and March 30, 2017.
“M” to Print outs of google
“M-1” map depicting the
distance where the
house of the private
complainant and the
house of the accused
where he maintains
his paramour.
“N” to Discharge Summary
“N-5” Records of private
complainant from
Philippine Heart
Center
“O” Judicial Affidavit of
May Ann Jelaine San
Juan France, the
second child of
parties
Page 3 of 4
Section (5i) of RA 9165.
The Accused objects to the
purpose of the offer specifically
which is to prove the fact that
the accused has violated Section
(5i) of RA 9165 for being a mere
speculation considering that the
complainant’s side of the stories
were presented and brought
before the Barangay. .
The Accused objects to the
purpose of the offer as it is based
on speculation. It failed to
establish the fact that indeed,
the Accused is living in that place
with his paramour. Their
accusation and affidavit are self-
serving to put the Accused in bad
position..
The Accused objects to the
purpose of the offer as it has no
probative value to support the
charges for violation of Section
(5i) of RA 9165.
The Accused objects to the offer
considering that the same has
failed to prove the allegations of
the complainant and self-serving.
The fact remains that despite
several occasions of physical
harm as she claimed, none of
these were reported to the
proper authorities for action.
On cross, the herein witness
admitted that she never reported
such incidents to the proper
 authorities for immediate action,
hence the same suffers
credibility problem as the same
was only came up during trial.

WHEREFORE, Accused most respectfully prays to this

Honorable Court that the foregoing object and documentary exhibits
mentioned above be denied admission for the reasons above stated.
The Accused further prays for such other relief as may be just and
equitable under the premises.

Balagtas, Bulacan for City of Malolos.

June 13, 2019

Respectfully submitted,

ATTY. FERDINAND H. RAMOS,CPA

Counsel for the Accused
2nd Floor., Unit No. 3, Jesus G. Austria Bldg.,
427 Brgy. Wawa, Balagtas, Bulacan
Tel No. (044) 308-4504
Roll of Attorney No. 70451
IBP No. 031519
PTR No. 1685979 C; 01/03/19; Balagtas, Bulacan
MCLE Compliance VI-0007316

Copy Furnished by Personal Service to:

ATTY. DOMICIANO A. PAGULAYAN

374 McArthur Highway, Wawa, Balagtas, Bulacan

EXPLANATION

The filing of this Comment/Objection was done through LBC

due to time, distance and manpower constraints.

ATTY. FERDINAND H.
RAMOS

Page 4 of 4