Affidavit - Arlyn Parreno Revlam
Affidavit - Arlyn Parreno Revlam
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
Parañaque City
ARLYN PARREÑO
Complainant,
____________________________
- versus - For: Trespass to Dwelling under Art.
280 of the Revised Penal Code
FATIMA SANTOS- PARREÑO,
WILMA SANTOS-JAVIER and
EMMA SANTOS-PILON.
Respondents.
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT
1
Hereafter, “Jan Andrew.”
2
Hereafter, “Sofia Reine.”
3
Hereafter, “Fatima.”
4
Hereafter, “Ms. Abad.”
5
Hereafter, “DSWD.”
6
Hereafter, “Wilma.”
7
Hereafter, “Emma.”
1
along with members of the Philippine National Police Special Weapon and
Tactics (PNP-SWAT), much to my surprise.
4. While Ms. Abad was explaining to me the reason for their visit and
the process to be undertaken concerning Sofia Reine’s custody, 8 Fatima forced
her way to our house and rushed to our living room against my will and then
abruptly took the two-year old baby. This was confirmed by Ms. Abad in her
statement9 when she said that:
7. Later on, we found out that Fatima called Raffy Tulfo’s program
and made it appear that we have taken Sofia Reine as a hostage. The staff of the
said program then called the Department of Social Welfare and Development 10
Office. Ms. Abad, Social Welfare Office II, explained to them that they cannot
unilaterally take custody of Sofia Reine since the law requires that the other
party, specifically the side of the father be given an opportunity to be heard and
that there is a procedure to follow in custody cases.
9. In fact, Fatima even visited our house last April 3, 2018 to celebrate
Sofia Reine’s birthday. If it were true that our family has taken Sofia Reine as
hostage, then why did Fatima join us for merriment on April 3. And if Fatima
8
Attached and marked as Annex “B” is a copy of the letter dated April 16, 2018 issued by Social
Welfare Officer Julichie Palen and noted by Officer-in-Charge Marissa Escalera.
9
Attached and marked as Annex “C” is a copy of the statement of Ms. Abad.
10
Hereafter, “DSWD.”
2
really believed that we “kidnapped” Sofia Reine, she had all the opportunity to
file a case for kidnapping, yet she did not do so. The reason for this is because
Fatima’s allegations of hostage taking is a mere fabrication.
10. Our generosity was repaid with disdain and evident bad faith.
Fatima along with her sisters forcefully took Sofia Reine without any legal order
and in clear violation of our right to privacy in our dwelling place.
13. Facts would show that Fatima and her sisters are private persons
who entered our dwelling. Furthermore, their entry was definitely against my
will. I was informed by my counsel regarding the case of People vs. Olimpio De
Peralta11 where the Supreme Court ruled that:
In order that this crime may exist it is necessary that the entrance
should be against the express or presumed prohibition of the occupant,
and the lack of permission should not be confused with prohibition. In
the decisions of the courts of Spain, as well as in those of this jurisdiction,
it has been held uniformly that this crime is committed when a person
enters another's dwelling against the will of the occupant, but not when
the entrance is effected without his knowledge or opposition.
14. After receiving the knock, I just opened a small portion of our gate
as any prudent person would do. I was then talking to the social worker who
remained to be outside our house. Taking advantage of their strength in
numbers, Fatima and her sisters forced their way through our gate and then our
house in their successful illegal attempt to abduct Sofia Reine. Their entry was
evidently against my will and I expressly prohibited them from entering our
dwelling place.
11
G.R. No. L-17332, August 17, 1921.
12
G.R. No. 88300, July 6, 1992.
3
Likewise, the trial court erred in disregarding morada which
aggravated the offense inasmuch as the crime took place and was
committed by the accused-appellant in the house of the victims. The
accused-appellant showed greater perversity in his deliberate invasion of
the tranquility and privacy of the Parnala's domicile.
16. Clearly Fatima and her sisters did not only abuse her right in
unilaterally assuming custody over Sofie Reine without any court imprimatur,
she likewise violated the privacy and tranquility of our dwelling place, an
offense for which they must be allowed to account for.
ARLYN PARREÑO
Affiant
Investigating Prosecutor
I hereby certify that I have personally examined the complainant and that
I am convinced that the foregoing is her true and voluntary act and deed.
Investigating Prosecutor
4
5