Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 6

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Justice
National Prosecution Service, Region III
Office of the Provincial Prosecutor
Malolos City, Bulacan

JULIE REYES y JANAP,


Complainant,

-versus- NPS Docket No. III-04-INQ-17B-00248


For: RAPE

DEO ANTONIO y MAGDAONG and


ANDREW LABAYO y TOBIAS,
Respondents.
x -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --x

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

COMES NOW, complainant JULIE REYES y JANAP, assisted


by the Public Attorney’s Office, through the undersigned counsel, to
the Honorable Office, most respectfully states, that:

1. On 6 March 2017, complainant secured a copy of the


resolution of this Honorable Office dated 13 February 2017 with
respect to the above-captioned case;

2. The Honorable Office through Assistant Provincial


Prosecutor Emily P. Dizon resolved to file information for Rape
against DEO ANTONIO y MAGDAONG.

3. However, the case against his co-respondent ANDREW


LABAYO y TOBIAS was recommended to be dismissed. In arriving
at such conclusion, the Honorable Office made the following
statement, to wit:

“The case against Andrew Labayo y Tobias is recommended


dismissed as there was no clear evidence of his participation in
the crime.”

4. To these findings, complainant-movant JULIE REYES


humbly moves for reconsideration;
5. With all due respect, the undersigned believes that there
is sufficient evidence on respondent's ANDREW LABAYO y
TOBIAS participation in the crime to support probable cause
for the indictment of the latter;

6. The following statement of facts were culled from


the affidavits of the complainant and her witnesses:

▪ Complainant and her siblings were having a


drinking spree on February 1, 2017 and at
around 6pm, respondents DEO and ANDREW
joined them;

▪ Around 9pm, complainant was left with the


respondents DEO and ANDREW and her
nephew Allison @ Buboy arrived to accompany
her;

▪ Respondents DEO and ANDREW went to buy


some liquor and when they returned,
complainant took some sip and felt sleepy so
she went inside the house and left the three
(3);

▪ Subsequently, Allison (Buboy) decided to go


home. On his way home, he saw ANDREW
standing in front of the complainant's room
and peeping through the window;

▪ Complainant's brother, Emmanuel also saw


respondent ANDREW in front of the
complainant's room and peeping through the
window. This prompted him to check on the
complainant and he was surprised to see a
baked person (respondent DEO) on top of his
unconscious and naked sister;

▪ Thereafter, Emmanuel grab a casserole and


threw the same to the respondent and chased
the latter who immediately fled together with
respondent ANDREW.
▪ The complainant was left naked and
unconscious despite being awakened and
slapped by her relatives.

▪ Days after the event, complainant received an


information that respondents were hiding in
the respndent ANDREW in Balagtas, Bulacan
and they were arrested therein PO1 Aldrin
Sacay and Jonjon Peralta.

7. Under Article 17 and 18 of the Revised Penal Code:

Art. 17. Principals.— The following are considered


principals:

1. Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act;


2. Those who directly force or induce others to commit it;
3. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by
another act without which it would not have been
accomplished.

Art. 18. Accomplices.— Accomplices are those persons who,


not being included in Art. 17, cooperate in the execution of
the offense by previous or simultaneous acts.

8. By carefully assessing the preceding series of


events, an average person can safely conclude that respondent
ANDREW acted in cooperation to or at least as an accomplice
to respondent DEO. They were together when they bought the
liquor that caused the complainant to suddenly feel sleepy and
unconscious like a dead vegetable. Respondent ANDREW was
also seen standing in front of the complainant's room and
checking on the inside through the window while respondent
DEO was raping the unconscious complainant. He also fled
after the complainant's brother arrived and chased the
respondents. Lastly, respondent ANDREW harbored
respondent DEO in his residence to evade arrest from the
authority;

9. To exonerate respondent ANDREW would be a


blatant disregard of the aforesaid circumstantial evidence.
Moreso, finding of probable cause need not be based on clear
evidence as stated in the subject resolution of this Honorable
Office;
10. The Supreme Court, in the case of Mark Reynald
Marasigan y De Guzman vs. Reginald Fuentes, et. al. (G.R. No. 201310,
January 11, 2016), defined probable cause for the purpose of filing a
criminal information, to wit:

“Probable cause, for the purpose of filing a criminal


information, has been defined as such facts as are sufficient
to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been
committed and that respondent is probably guilty thereof.
The term does not mean "actual and positive cause" nor does
it import absolute certainty. It is merely based on opinion
and reasonable belief. Probable cause does not require an
inquiry into whether there is sufficient evidence to procure a
conviction. It is enough that it is believed that the act or
omission complained of constitutes the offense charged.”

“A finding of probable cause needs only to rest on evidence


showing that more likely than not a crime has been
committed by the suspects. It need not be based on clear and
convincing evidence of guilt, not on evidence establishing guilt
beyond reasonable doubt, and definitely not on evidence
establishing absolute certainty of guilt. In determining probable
cause, the average man weighs facts and circumstances
without resorting to the calibrations of the rules of evidence
of which he has no technical knowledge. He relies on
common sense. What is determined is whether there is
sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a
crime has been committed, and that the accused is probably
guilty thereof and should be held for trial. It does not require
an inquiry as to whether there is sufficient evidence to
secure a conviction.”

Prayer

WHEREFORE, in the higher interest of substantial justice, it is


most respectfully prayed of this Honorable Office that the Resolution
dated 13 February 2017 be reconsidered, thereby recommending the
filing of an information against respondent ANDREW LABAYO y
TOBIAS for Rape whether as principal by indispensable cooperation or
at least as an accomplice.

Such other relief and remedies as may be available under the


circumstances are, likewise, prayed for.

Malolos City, Bulacan, 7 March 2017.

Department of Justice
PUBLIC ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
Malolos City District Office
2nd Floor, Hall of Justice Building
Provincial Capitol Compound
Malolos City
Tel. No. 305-03-70

By:

JAN STEVEN S. DUNUAN


Public Attorney IV / Officer-In-Charge
Roll No. 52592
IBP Lifetime No. 955578; 1-7-15
MCLE Compliance No. V-0010141; 9-9-15

EVAN CARLOS D. PINGOL


Public Attorney I
Roll of Attorney’s No. 64822
IBP Lifetime No. 013753; 04-15-15
MCLE Compliance No. V-0018624; 4-15-16

Copy furnished by Registered Mail:

DEO ANTONIO y MAGDAONG


#18 Pag-asa St., Malhakan,
Meycauayan, Bulacan

ANDREW LABAYO y TOBIAS


#544 San Juan, Balagtas, Bulacan

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES }


PROVINCE OF BULACAN } S.S.

VERIFICATION

I, JULIE REYES y JANAP, Filipino, of legal age, and residing at


#126 D. Gonzales St., Tabe, Guiguinto, Bulacan, after having been
sworn in accordance with law, do hereby depose and state, THAT:

1. I am the complainant in the above-entitled case;


2. I have caused the preparation of the foregoing Motion for
Reconsideration;
3. I have read and understood the contents thereof, after the
same were explained to me;
4. The allegations contained therein are true and correct of
my own personal knowledge and belief and based on documents.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature


this 7th day of March 2017, here at City of Malolos, Bulacan.

JULIE REYES y JANAP


Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 7th day of


March 2017 here at City of Malolos, Bulacan, as competent proof of
identity, affiant exhibited to me her UMID ID with CRN No.
__________________.

Вам также может понравиться