INCIDENT SUPPORTING DOCUMENT

Veronica was supposed discharged from the Lady of the Pillar Hospital documents
Medical Center for acute delirium. All children were by C-section.
2006
Three children: Trixie (1), Blessy (3), Driggs (5-6). Veronica, the
wife, did not always stay with R.
Used to work at Skyfreight Brokerage Inc. with Veronica. Was a
customs representative (processes papers, payments in banks,
and containers); Veronica was a supervisor in the Accounting
division (releases checks and the like to facilitate customs;
handled primarily SSS and salary loans). One day V requested
that R sacrifice himself for the children because (1) pineperahan
sila ng parents ni R, (2) children were sickly, and (3) R is better
with household work.
Was given money, but barely enough to open a computer shop
(he also lost money from it due to injury).
2009
(around Sept-Oct) Drix was already enrolled in Pateros Enrollement documents
elementary. One day, she took Drix with him to be transferred to (certifications, report cards)
a school in Imus, Cavite. He took him back (besides, the son
wanted to stay with R).
Basis for complaint with the barangay (took the son without the Barangay proceedings
wife's permission, but he had an enrollment certificate). This led documents; agreements
to the first Kasunduan dated December 2009: the children were
to be with R, but they arrived at staggered dates-- the youngest,
Trixie, arrived April 2010.
2010
Around April, the children were still with R. Things were okay
until V returned, this time as a "Born Again Christian." She
wanted to solve matters, and to get R working again. She claims
to have lost money due to debts (and in the end, R was still
supporting the children).
However, at this time, she had affairs with 2 others: Candelaria
and Montalan. This made her new stay with the family short-
lived. He learned of this because he was tending to his computer
shop, and he coincidentally found out that V was chatting with
the 2 'others' through YM. She claimed they were just good
friends. R wondered why V still had these other men when she
claims to be Christian.
By November, he reported to his PAO attorney Figueroa (who PAO District Office Issuances
helped handle the kasunduan) of what V was doing. They were (e.g. mediation)
supposed to have conferences, but V would be absent.
2011
R found out that V was still chatting with the 2 others, and even Chat with Hershey Candelaria
deposited money in their accounts (the Candelaria account;
10k). R found out through slips placed in V's bible's pocket. Upon
learning the funds were being sent to Candelaria's wife,
Hershey, he confronted Hershey, and they had an exchange
("Malandi yang asawa mo"); Hershey was not willing to testify
against her husband because "mawawalan daw siya ng
sustento." Around this time, V left again.
Around Mother's Day that year, V went to the barangay and
wanted custody over the children again, but the barangay
stressed the previous agreement and told her that if she is not
agreeable, she should file a case.
 2012
They were to have a mediation conference on June 6, 2012 Barangay proceedings
(through Atty. Pami of PAO Bacoor; warned V re: possible PAO proceedings
conflict of interest). The conference was called by V for non-
compliance with barangay agreement and violation of RA 9262.
Apparently, V was asked for a medico-legal report, and R argued
back: that there was an agreement with the Bacoor barangay
dated January 6, 2012 (palit-palitan ng bahay every 2 weeks).
Whatever case V was intending to file was not filed (she argued
that she was forced to some of the conditions; e.g. give
groceries).
Now under Atty. Migrino (Pateros). They found out from Atty.
Pami that V was not following their agreement. This led to the
Petition for Custody with RTC Pateros. Provisional custody was
originally awarded to R, but they later conceded in favor of V (but
R has visitation rights and can even stay at V's house during the
weekend).
First contempt (supposed; was advised not to file contempt):
Sept. 9: She didn't abide by their agreement. She pledged
money per month, but she didn't follow.
2013
At this time, R's computer shop business was beginning to
weaken due to competition.
August 2013: V asked R to bring Blessy with her (to visit). Letters from the children
Instead of just letting her visit, she took Blessy. R spoke with
Blessy via phone, and Blessy told him that she wanted to go
home. This led to the First Filed Contempt (GRANTED; fine
P10k).
2014
Judge, thanks to letters from the children, stressed na maawa Letters from the children
daw sila sa mga anak. V would still visit per agreement. One Necessary orders
day, V asked if R should step down especially since R is capable
of visiting anyway. This led to the agreement where provisional
custody became in favor of V. Around June that year, however
(Father's Day), V refused to have R visit because her dad didn't
want R around. This led to the Second Filed Contempt (DENIED;
wala nasa bahay ng tatay eh).
By the end of 2014, the children were with V, but R was no
longer able to see the children until V texted him one day to meet
up (gown for Blessy). R contacted the children for pasalubong.
The meeting seemed 'okay.' (she even bought him new glasses)
For Drix's birthday, they wanted to meet up again (this time with
the children). At this time, V was pregnant with a child from
another man. They were able to do so, and they wanted to meet
up again. V said that she did not want to meet up (she claimed to
be sick; she sent money instead for the children). This was the
last time they met (around end of 2014).
2015
R visited the children at school. The children asked R if they
could stay at Pateros for the summer. R told them they had to
ask permission from the mother. They had the visit.
Later that year (March, as the children arrived), R visited his old
workplace, and he was being congratulated. Trixie arrived April
1. Around this time, he began learning that V was pregnant. By
the end of the summer, he asked the children where they would
 go to school (he recognizes V at the time had more money; R's
debts piled up).
There was another hearing in the custody case (March);
suggested to keep Drix since their agreement in favor of
Veronica ended. Drix and Blessy preferred their dad. Trixie had
no idea which to follow. Around May, R learned from Trixie's
diary that she actually wanted to stay with V.
All of a sudden, a relative of V's arrived to pick up the children Barangay reports; affidavits
(but had no court order to show); R was informed of this by the
barangay, and they did not let V's relative take the children.
One day, the kids wanted to watch a movie (Jadin),
accompanied by R's minor cousin (15 y/o). The money to watch
was given to the daughters in case of snatchers. A text was
supposedly sent to them; the two daughters asked to go to the
CR, but they didn't return (apparently, V took them without letting
R know; he found out through his cousin-- the mother TOLD the
child to text the cousin "Okay na kasama namin si nanay").
Because of this, R suggested to Drix to follow his siblings (so he
can take care of them).
July 18: He would meet with the children in school. He would Birth certificate of Andres Jr.
then learn around July 18 (from Drix) that V gave birth. Drix saw Statements of events at the
Andres Montallan who visited (father of the 'new' child). hospital
2016
Mar 29: This was when the ADULTERY case was filed upon Counter-affidavits
learning of the birth certificate of the child. (also, supplemental
affidavit on custody case was filed to update the court of recent
events)
Next saw children August 10 in Pateros (custody). Fiscal and
judge told him to set another agreement with V; V instead asked
for an amount to be paid in order to borrow the children. He
agreed, but via Pera Padala. No one appeared when it was time
to fetch the children (SHOULD BE BASIS FOR THIRD FILED
CONTEMPT).
But at this time, PAO dropped R, and IBP hasn't replied for Supplemental affidavit
possible representation. Payslips
PAO Withdrawal Form and
Pleading
Simultaneously, a VAWC case was filed August 8, claiming VAWC Complaint
physical injuries and claims from Blessy that R abused V. Counter-affidavits (if any)
Bruises in thighs and forearms (supposedly pulled from the arm).
Texts were due to his anger because of V's actions (txts supp.
from R, but it didn't show the number).
INVENTORY OF DOCUMENTS:
Custody Case
DATE DOCUMENT TITLE
2009 Dec 14 Ikatlong Paghaharap (Barangay
level)
2012 Jan 6 Matiwasay na Pag-aayos
(Barangay level; Bacoor)
2012 Jan 18 Incident Report. Health Complex at Veronica did not follow their agreement(?);
Cavite (incomplete)
2012 Jan 25 Incident Report: Sa labas ng
bahay ni Arturo de Guzman (in
Cavite?); R as complainant
(incomplete)
2012 Jan 29 Incident Report: Seems to be
related to one of the children
(incomplete; latter half was given) freedom to return to Pateros)
2012 Jun 6 Notice of mediation/conciliation
conference with PAO (ADR); No
documents presented in
connection
2012 Oct 29 Petition filed with RTC Pasig
2012 Nov 28 Pretrial Conference Order
2012 Nov 28 Notice of Pretrial Conference (also EJ Danilo S. Cruz
with respect to Rule on Custody on
Minors and Writ of Habeas Corpus
in Relation to Custody of Minors)
2013 Jan 22 Case Study Report by Municipality <see Custody Case>; recommended
2013 Mar 08 Order for Provisional Custody
(Compromise Agreement)
2013 Apr 05 Order: Opposition to Contempt
Petition filed
Blotter 1 (Vladimir del Rosario,
brother)
CONTENTS
No agreement reached. R arrived, but V did
not. Barangay noted the distance between
their respective barangays.
Agreement on custody, support and
schooling (study in Pateros; they would stay
in alternating sides, later V only and at one
point, R only; groceries)
the document given only included events
where V said “Magulo raw” and R, along
with a Kagawad and EX-O, went to V’s
house
Re: Kasunduan: Confrontation between
both sides; only one page was given
(seems incomplete); can’t determine if there
was violation of their agreement
Seems the children do not want to come
with Veronica (Veronica not giving children
<see Custody Case>
custody in favor of R
Rodrigo to take care of children, especially
as they are still enrolled in East Rembo.
Veronica may visit.
At this time, Veronica earned around
P16k/month (para f).
Apparently, Veronica did not want/took
Blessie from Rodrigo in spite of the
presence of the agreement.
Support: Certification dated 27 May 2013
Report Card: grades are middling at 82.6
average, but not failing (the agreement only
vests custody on Veronica IF the grades
are failing)
Apparently, V was with Blessie at the time,
but she was not able to go to school
because of her.
 Blotter 2 (Gloria Dones, Their agreement was that the children will
godmother) be brought to Gloria Dones before going to
the other side. At the time of the incident,
the children were not brought to her house
when it was time to switch.
2014 Jan 06 Order denying MR re contempt MR DENIED. Veronica directed to bring the
(merely justifications of defiance to child to the Court for hearing on January 27,
compromise agreement) 2014
2014 June 30 Order Another indirect contempt urgent motion.

Agreement: V to have children, but R can

have the children for the weekends. (seems
they are now enrolled in Cavite?)
2014 Jul 5 Chest X-ray re: Blessie Mae Injured; suggestive of atelectactic changes
of an undetermined underlying lung
pathology (POSSIBLE COLLAPSE OF
LUNG), compensatory hyperaeration of the
right lung (lungs expanded)
2014 Oct 28 Case Study Report #2 Reiterated findings in the first case study
report
2015 May 14 Sumbong sa Barangay; Market Complaint: Veronica took the children from
Market movie R’s cousin, who was accompanying them
2015 Aug 7 Order; JDR reset, possible ruling
on contempt
2015 Sep 3 Barangay Certification; Rod as
(***) INDIGENT
2015 Sep 3 Letter from Driggs “Pinasarado ni Veronica iyong cellphone ko;
hindi hinatad kina Auntie Glorie; kinuha pa
nga cellphone niya kasi nagsalita siya sa
korte”
2016 Mar 3 Supplemental JudAff Used to prove he is a position to support his
minor children, and that Veronica is unfit.

Additional Exhibits:
S – Southbend, via Tobobsky’s: P17.5k
T – Veronica pulled out Blessie in 2013, but
the agreement in favor of R was still there
U – Unreadable
V – Blessie wants to stay in Pateros for
summer break
W – Trixie does not like Veronica (odd
thing, one year after this letter, Trixie
preferred Veronica; 2014-2015)
X – Salaysay re events
Y – Driggs; Veronica not following
agreement
AA – DD – FB profile; previously had
picture of baby; later became Veronica
alone
2016 Aug 10 DQ from PAO legal assistance
2016 Aug 11 Withdrawal of PAO legal
assistance
Adultery Case

- certificate of live birth of Andres Jr., BORN July 18, 2015

- affidavit of admission of paternity by Andres Montalan Jr. EXECUTED August 3, 2015
- statements on hospital stay of V for childbirth: Driggs saw Andres arrive while Veronica’s
father was asleep; supposedly on July 28, Arlene Escalis of the records section saw
Veronica bring home the document for the birth certi
- certificate of marriage
- investigation data report of OPS dated July 2016
- counter-affidavits filed 20 Sep 2016

VAWC Case

- Complaint and exhibits

- Subpoena for Aug 16/30 hearing

--------

DISCUSSION OF INCOME: “College level”; Aircraft technician from PATTS; Works as

messenger/collector(?) -

- Earns P17.5k a month supposedly net income (see Tobobosky’s pay slips)
- Claims that he earns P700 a day now, but that is a flat amount that includes expenses for
work (P100 motorcycle rental, P200 fuel) = 22 x (700-300) = 8800 net (this was only
narrated; he could have presented receipts)
- Southbend supposedly had him create a ‘company’ to show he’s an independent
collector—Tobobsky’s Messengerial and Collection Services (registered as barangay-scope
business in Pateros; according to the applicant, he goes around Makati and Manila)

CUSTODY CASE (ARGUMENTS AND EVIDENCE):

Petition Contents:

- Para 3 and 4: The two got married seemingly after Veronica told Rod (they were
together years before their children were born) that she was pregnant. Their marriage
produced three children: Driggs (2000), Blessie (2002), and Trixie (2004). Evidenced by
Annexes A-D.
- Para 5: Five years after their marriage (May 2005), V was diagnosed with ACUTE
DELIRIUM (along with UTI). The document and petition did not state anything about the
events leading up to the acute delirium (*** Acute delirium means that the delirium may
be one-off; it is not a lasting condition ***).

Mayo Clinic: “Delirium is a serious disturbance in mental abilities that results in confused thinking and reduced awareness of your
environment. The start of delirium is usually rapid — within hours or a few days.

Delirium can often be traced to one or more contributing factors, such as a severe or chronic medical illness, changes in your
metabolic balance (such as low sodium), medication, infection, surgery, or alcohol or drug withdrawal.”

Signs and symptoms of delirium usually begin over a few hours or a few days. They often fluctuate throughout the day, and there
may be periods of no symptoms. Symptoms tend to be worse during the night when it's dark and things look less familiar. Primary
signs and symptoms include those below.

Reduced awareness of the environment

 This may result in:

An inability to stay focused on a topic or to switch topics

Getting stuck on an idea rather than responding to questions or conversation
Being easily distracted by unimportant things
Being withdrawn, with little or no activity or little response to the environment
Poor thinking skills (cognitive impairment)

This may appear as:

Poor memory, particularly of recent events

Disorientation, for example, not knowing where you are or who you are
Difficulty speaking or recalling words
Rambling or nonsense speech
Trouble understanding speech
Difficulty reading or writing
Behavior changes

This may include:

Seeing things that don't exist (hallucinations)

Restlessness, agitation or combative behavior
Calling out, moaning or making other sounds
Being quiet and withdrawn — especially in older adults
Slowed movement or lethargy
Disturbed sleep habits
Reversal of night-day sleep-wake cycle
Emotional disturbances

This may appear as:

Anxiety, fear or paranoia

Depression
Irritability or anger
A sense of feeling elated (euphoria)
Apathy
Rapid and unpredictable mood shifts
Personality changes
Types of delirium

Some doctors find that people who develop UTI may have delirium as a manifestation of the UTI.

- Para 6: On and Off Relationship; Agreement where children will remain with V but R
may visit; Para 7: V not following agreement, more patawags scheduled (F and G). Para
8: Conferences were also scheduled, but V failed to appear (H and I)
- Para 10-11: Matiwasay na Pag-aayos (alternating); V did not provide groceries or inform
the children that R will pick them up (K and K-1)
- Para 12-13: Found that Trixie and Blessie were injured/sick; V did not seem to take care
of them (L and M)
- Para 14: Children brought to V because it is her turn; complained

Arguments:

- Toxic environment at Veronica’s house

- Distance to school in Makati
- V maintains illicit relationship with a classmate (screenshot of messages with Hershey
Candelaria); FB profile pics
- From Case Study Report (2013):
o Apparently, R had a run in with Veronica’s brother, where he threatened R with a
knife, and with the father, who tried to go after R with a metal pipe.
- From Supplemental JudAff (2016):
o “Businessman”, currently employed as messenger and collector of Tobobsky’s
(according to Rod, he is the only employee, as he is actually a contractor for
 Southbend Management, Inc. SMInc. seems to be a contractor; FB pages seem
to show only pictures of the office. Office only appears to be two warehouses; no
information other than what’s in the 360 pic in Google.
o Payslips show income of P17.5k (Exhibit S); this was one reason PAO dropped
him
o Events since 2012 were appended as evidence in the judaff; handwritten blotters
show children prefer Rod (U, V, W, X, Y)

Counter-arguments (NO OPPOSITION PRESENTED)

Discussion of Law (PETITION DID NOT CITE A LAW)

- In case of legal separation of the parents, the custody of the minor children shall be
awarded to the innocent spouse, unless otherwise directed by the court in the interest of
the minor children.[13] But when the husband and wife are living separately and apart
from each other, without decree of the court, the court shall award the care, custody,
and control of each child as will be for his best interest, permitting the child to choose
which parent he prefers to live with if he is over seven (7) years of age unless the parent
so chosen be unfit to take charge of the child by reason of moral depravity, habitual
drunkenness or poverty. (Sy v CA, 2007) – ALL OF THE CHILDREN ARE OVER
SEVEN YEARS OF AGE.
- Which means the presumption in favor of the mother is COMPLETELY ABSENT. The
rule is simply best interest: physical, educational, social and moral welfare, alongside
resources and social/moral situations of the parents.

- Art. 229. Unless subsequently revived by a final judgment, parental authority also
terminates:

(1) Upon adoption of the child;

(2) Upon appointment of a general guardian;

(3) Upon judicial declaration of abandonment of the child in a case filed for the purpose;

(4) Upon final judgment of a competent court divesting the party concerned of parental
authority; or

(5) Upon judicial declaration of absence or incapacity of the person exercising parental
authority. (327a)

- Art. 231. The court in an action filed for the purpose in a related case may also suspend
parental authority if the parent or the person exercising the same:

(1) Treats the child with excessive harshness or cruelty;

(2) Gives the child corrupting orders, counsel or example;

(3) Compels the child to beg; or

(4) Subjects the child or allows him to be subjected to acts of lasciviousness.

The grounds enumerated above are deemed to include cases which have resulted from culpable
negligence of the parent or the person exercising parental authority.
If the degree of seriousness so warrants, or the welfare of the child so demands, the court shall
deprive the guilty party of parental authority or adopt such other measures as may be proper
under the circumstances.

The suspension or deprivation may be revoked and the parental authority revived in a case filed
for the purpose or in the same proceeding if the court finds that the cause therefor has ceased and
will not be repeated.

ADULTERY CASE (ARGUMENTS AND EVIDENCE):

Key points of IDS:

- 2014: smelled something rotten in the private part; she claimed that she loves the lord
and she will not do something or commit adultery (!?!?!?)
- held on to the certificate of HER illegitimate child
- supposedly, children witnessed V speaking to another man and said I LOVE YOU on
the cellphone (JUly 18 2015 – was it Andres?), and that Andres introduced himself as
the son of Andres Jr.

Arguments: (NO COMPLAINT GIVEN; BASED OFF INVESTIGATION DATA SHEET, WHICH
HAD A SALAYSAY, WHICH ANDRES AND CO. REPLIED TO):

- Veronica married Andres Jr., and had a child with him, while our marriage was
subsisting. (so why didn’t he file for bigamy?)
- Incident happened July 18, 2015, in Bacoor, Cavite. Relies on the fact of pregnancy,
and the I LOVE YOU.

Counter-arguments:

Andres:

- There was no act of sexual intercourse. No evidence was adduced to prove the fact of
sexual intercourse. He had a purely professional relationship with Veronica.
- There were inconsistent statements in the complaint that suggest it was merely
fabricated. According to the complaint, the date of commission was 18 July 2015 at Brgy.
Mambog 1, Bacoor. The childbirth took place on that day. It is clear that sexual
intercouse cannot in any way be committed (also, if the statements are true, Andres
visited on July 25).
- Q-4: He never married Veronica—this was not even evidenced. (important: This means
that there is recognition that Rodrigo is STILL the lawfully-wed husband).
- Q-6: Birth certificate cannot be proof of sexual intercourse; moreover, it is confidential
under PD 603 (no information EXCEPT upon request of the person himself, or an
authorized person; spouse/parents/direct descendants/guardian in charge if minor;
court/proper public official whenever absolutely necessary in proceedings to determine
identity of child; nearest of kin in case of death).
- He denies that Veronica is married. (but it seems the children are aware of Andres; was
Andres aware of the children? Wouldn’t they have clued in on the possibility that
Veronica was already married?)

Veronica:

- Actually, it is Rodrigo has a problem. He has an abusive personality. (no evidence)

 - Complainant would call her condescending names (pokpok, PI, malandi, etc.) in front of
the kids. (in the same breath she stated that these were in computer print-outs of text
messages, annex “1”; all dated Mar 5/20 2013; there were already prior incident reports
of Veronica’s non-willingness to abide by kasunduans)
- He also had a habit of physically harming her (reasons for filing VAWC).
- Complainant was controlling of the children, and used them when demanding more
money from her. This was the reason the children eventually lived with her.
- The children were being brainwashed against her.
- After barangay proceedings, they agreed to live separately and leave each other alone
for good.
- WRT custody: R filed the custody case to force her to give a higher amount of monthly
support. He raised false and unbelievable narratives to control the children. The children
preferred her because the father was ‘crazy.’ In fact, R never gave financial support.

(all of these are IRRELEVANT; the key act in adultery is the sexual intercourse)

- Inconsistent statements angle reiterated; no evidence to show there was any sexual
intercourse; she never married Andres
- Pregnancy not element of adultery; the alleged birth certificate is not proof of exual
intercourse. Even then, protected under PD 603.
- Any further affairs were already condoned.The two were already separated since 2012.
He may have already been aware of other affairs since he called her a whore, flirt and
motherfucker. She cites People v Guinucud: the agreeement can explain inaction after
knowing of the affair.

Discussion of Law

- RPC 333 (Adultery): Elements of adultery:

o Woman is MARRIED
o SEXUAL INTERCOURSE with MAN not her husband
o Man MUST KNOW her to be married
- Fact of marriage was sufficiently proven through the certificate of marriage; should be
noted that there was never any annulment proceeding of any sort.
- Carnal knowledge is problematic. According to the salaysay used as the complaint,
carnal knowledge took place on July 19, 2015, or some time before, which resulted in
the baby. (“By the end of 2014, the children were with V, but R was no longer able to
see the children until V texted him one day to meet up (gown for Blessy). R contacted
the children for pasalubong. The meeting seemed 'okay.' (she even bought him new
glasses)”) R would only visit on the weekends, if he could. At any rate, July 19 was the
date of birth of the child. Had there been sexual intercourse, someone from the hospital
could have reported it (even prior to trial, he could at least have known from someone;
this is important because R claims that Driggs saw Andres in the hospital on certain
days, just not the 19th)
- Knowledge of marriage: Counteraffidavit merely denied. Statements in the complaint
don’t allege that Andres knew: he adverted that she was pregnant with ‘another man’
(doesn’t prove mental state of Andres), that she ‘married’ Andres (ditto), the “I LOVE
YOU” (non-romantic friends do this too), and Driggs said that Andres introduced himself
as the father of Andres Jr.
 - Implied pardon theory: Had the husband interfered with their relations/asserted rights as
husband, it may be considered as negating implied pardon. It seems he did not really
do so. He called Andres Jr. “the wife’s illegitimate son”, but it didn’t seem he really tried
to stop their relationship. >> this applies even if there is an agreement to separate in fact.
- Birth certificate as evidence: Irrelevant to prove sexual intercourse. What of possibility of
presumption of paternity? Art. 166 FC Sec. 1b – Physically impossible to have sexual
intercourse with the wife within first 120 days of the 300 days which immediately
preceded birth because of fact they were living separately in such a way sexual
intercourse was not possible; possibly for biological and other scientific reasons, child
could not have been through the husband. 1b may be problematic as the law considers
different provinces (Pateros to Cavite is NOT that far; around 2-3 hours; thank you
Llaranaga; they could not be together for long periods of time, maybe not even overnight
due to [1] the dad, [2] their constant infighting); DNA rule (to establish non-paternity;
could be invoked byu opposing party) – At any rate, NO ACTION WAS FILED. (Herrera
v Alba) Consider FC 167: Legitimate although mother declared against legitimacy or
may have been sentenced as an adulteress. (1 year prescription; it is Rodrigo who
should file)
- Contrast: RPC 334 (Concubinage): Elements of concubinage:
o KEEPING A MISTRESS in conjugal dwelling
o Sexual intercouse, under scandalous circumstances, with woman not his wife
o Cohabitating with the woman in any other place

VAWC CASE (ARGUMENTS AND EVIDENCE):

Arguments:

- They could not even stay together for a year. They would fight and live apart from each
other. They would come to terms, but she would get pregnant every time they would
conciliate.
- He would frequently try to control her, and blow up if she did not follow. (when?)
- He would verbally abuse and humiliate her. (how? when?) (e.g. 2003 housing loan)
- 1998: Fight in mall. Rod made a scene. Was humiliated. Only stopped when Rod knew
she was pregnant. The baby was lost during the sixth month. “A lot of people know how
badly Rod had treated me and they can attest to that.” (who are these people?)
- Rod’s family witnessed the maltreatment towards her and the children. Rod did not
support the children. (explain the contempt, etc.)
- The cellphones given by her were thrown away or sold. (explain the letter by Driggs)
- 2012 Christmas: Was to fetch the kids. Rod was fuming mad, and beat her up, and
unloaded verbal abuse. (medico-legal certificate; district hospital; examined 26 Dec) –
hematoma in the lateral humeral area, left forearm, and right forearm (‘Rod pulled my
arms and pushed me back to the chair.’)
- 2013 March: Text messages. (supp Driggs was sick)
- 2013 April: Poisoned cake. Claimed that teacher said it was poisoned.
- Affidavit from Blessie. She’s 13 y/o. The language of the affidavit is suspect: 12) We
have been mistreated and abused in the hands of Papa. Thus, it is time for the law to
serve its purpose and the administration of justice take its course. (compare exh V)

Theory:

- Causing physical harm: For all the times she was physically hurt
 - Reckless conduct: Harass at work; use children to call at work (needs testimonies)
- Mental/emotional anguish: Expletives; did not take care of children; no financial support
(contrary evidence on Rod’s part; especially explain the case study reports)

Problem: Evidence is lacking. Some of the statements are bare allegations.