REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

SUPREME COURT
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES
10th Judicial Region
Branch 3
Cagayan de Oro City

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CRIM. CASE NO. M-CDO-

Complainant, 19-00992-CR

-versus- For: ESTAFA

MARGIELOU R. ALISBO,
Accused,
x------------------------------------------------/

JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT

This is the Judicial Affidavit of JULIET E CATAYEN. This was

taken on ______________ in the office of Atty. Tiburcio M. Palasan, Jr. at
Door 1, Ramada Goodwill Building, Rizal-Fernandez Sts., Cagayan de
Oro City. The proceeding was duly recorded and it was conducted in a
language understood by the affiant and fully conscious that she do so
under oath and may face criminal liability for false testimony and
perjury.

OFFER OF TESTIMONY: To prove that the herein accused

MARGIELOU R. ALISBO, who is a former cashier of Asian Marine
Transport Corp-Cagayan de Oro City, has committed the crime of
Estafa/swindling which is punishable under the Revised Penal Code,
during her tenure with such company as its cashier. Furthermore, the
witness will testify on relevant matters.

1. Q. Please state your name, address, and other personal

circumstances.
A. My name is JULIET E. CATAYEN, of legal age, married, Filipino,
and a resident of Deca Homes, Tungkil, Minglanilla, Cebu.

2. Q. What is your highest educational attainment?

Judicial affidavit
Page 1 of 9
 A: I am a graduate of BS Criminology.

3. Q: Do you understand the English language or do you prefer Visayan

dialect?
A: Yes I can understand the English language and I prefer this
Judicial Affidavit to be in the English language.

4. Q: Presently, what is your occupation, if any?

A: Last July 8, 2019, I returned working with Asian Marine Transport
Corp.

5. Q: Do you know a certain MARGIELOU R. ALISBO, who is the

accused in the herein case?
A: Yes sir, she works formerly with Asian Marine Transport Corp.
She was hired on February 9, 2015 as cashier in Cagayan de Oro City.
She was subsequently terminated on August 2, 2016.

6. Q: You said that you just returned working with the said company,
what was your Job title then?
A: Before I resigned last July 2018, I was one of their Audit and
Security Staff.

7. Q: Will you please specify your jod description as the then Audit and
Security Staff?
A: As one of the former Audit and Security Staff, my job was to
conduct an actual cash count of the petty cash revolving fund and audit
the sales of the different Asian Marine Transport Corp. (AMTC) stations
and branches.

8. Q: What happened on June 1, 2016, if any?

A: I went to one of our branches which is located in Cagayan de Oro
City, to check and audit the cashier assigned thereat.

9. Q: What happened then, if any?

A: When I arrived thereat, the cashier at that time was Linel Rojas. I,
however, found out that there were still unpaid accounts and it was
during the time of cashier MARGIELOU R. ALISBO.

10. Q: You said that, their where still unpaid accounts and it was during
the time of cashier MARGIELOU R. ALISBO. Will you please explain
with particularity what do you mean by such?
A: When I looked first on the “Vale Slip,” I found out that for the year
2015, there was a total unliquidated amount of NINE THOUSAND ONE
HUNDRED THIRTY EIGHT PESOS (Php 9,138.00). Moreover, for the
Judicial affidavit
Page 2 of 9
year 2016, I also found out an unliquidated amount of THREE
THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED PESOS (Php 3,100.00). I was then
wondering why there was such an unliquidated amounts for such year
where in fact, there is a company policy that for minimal amounts the
same should be liquidated within 24 hours and for higher amounts
particularly as regards operations, the same should be liquidated within
2 to 3 days. By reason thereof then, I found out that the amounts
mentioned was still unliquidated.

11. Q: Do you have proofs to show that will prove what you just said?
A: Yes sir I have. The “Vale Slips” is hereto attached as EXHIBITS “B”
to “B-1”.

12. Q: What happened next, if any?

A: After which, I checked the “Replenishment Request in Process.”
Based on such, an amount of TWENTY THREE THOUSAND THREE
HUNDRED FORTY FIVE (Php 23,345.00) was declared by
MARGIELOU R. ALISBO, as still to be replenish to Linel Rojas, the
cashier at that time when I conducted the audit. The truth of the matter
however will show that the same was already replenish.

13. Q: Do you have any documents to prove the same?

A: Yes sir. First is the “Accounts Payable Voucher” prepared by
MARGIELOU R. ALISBO. It will show that the amount mentioned
above as still to be replenish. The same documents is hereto attached as
EXHIBIT “C” to “C-1”. Second is the “Asian Marine Transport
Corporation Request For Payment” that was already approved and the
amount specified therein is TWENTY THREE THOUSAND THREE
HUNDRED FORTY FIVE (Php 23,345.00). The same document is hereto
attached as EXHIBIT “D”. Third is the Check Voucher and the Deposit
Slip. The same will show that the amount of FIFTY SEVEN THOUSAND
SIX HUNDRED SEVENTY THREE PESOS AND EIGHTY FIVE
CENTAVOS (Php 57,673.88) was deposited to BDO Bank account no.
006600121148. The same amount includes the TWENTY THREE
THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED FORTY FIVE (Php 23,345.00).The
same document consisting of Check Voucher and the Deposit is hereto
attached as EXHIBIT “E”. Fourth is the Withdrawal Slip. It will prove
that the amount of FIFTY SEVEN THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED
SEVENTY THREE PESOS AND EIGHTY FIVE CENTAVOS (Php
57,673.88 was already withdrawn by MARGIELOU R. ALISBO from
BDO Bank account no. 006600121148 on May 6, 2016. The withdrawal
slip as proof of which is hereto attached as EXHIBIT “F.” Lastly, being
the casher, she has custody over the passbook for the account as herein
mentioned. The same is hereto attached as EXHIBIT “G”.
Judicial affidavit
Page 3 of 9
14. Q: By the way, where was MARGIELOU R. ALISBO when you
conducted the audit?
A: When I conducted the audit, she was on maternity leave.

15. Q What periods were covered in her maternity leave?

A: As per company records, she was on maternity leave from May
12, 2016, to July 12, 2016. A copy of same document mentioned, is hereto
attached and was already marked as EXHIBIT “E” for the prosection.

Manifestation: As the original copy of EXHIBIT “E” is here with the

witness, may we be allowed by this Honorable Court to compare the
records of this court regarding EXHIBIT “E” if the same is the true and
faithful photocopy of the original. Also, we also would like to ask from
this Honorable court that EXHIBIT “E” be remark as EXHIBIT “H” for
cronological order purposes.

16. Q: What happened next, if any?

A: After such findings, I reported the matter to the accounting
department when I returned to Cebu City, where our central branch is
located. Thereafter, I conducted a further investigation of the incident
and it was found out that those unliquidated advances were the fault of
then cashier Margielou Alisbo, the herein accused. Also, I found out that
there where unpaid amounts due to the Philippine Ports Authority.

17. Q: You said that based on such further study, you found out that
there where unpaid amounts due to the Philippine Ports Authority. Will
you please elaborate the matter?
A: I found out that on June 08, 2015, Margielou Alisbo, prepared an
“Accounts Payable Voucher” the amount of which is SIXTEEN
THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY TWO PESOS AND FOURTEEN
CENTAVOS (Php 16, 552.14). The same document is hereto attached as
EXHIBIT “I”.Also, there is a Check Voucher with the same amount
dated June 1, 2015 and the same is hereto attached as EXHIBIT “J”.
Afterwhich, the same amount of SIXTEEN THOUSAND FIVE
HUNDRED FIFTY TWO PESOS AND FOURTEEN CENTAVOS (Php
16, 552.14) was deposited to BDO Bank account no. 006600121148. Proof
of such is the deposit slip which is hereto attached as EXHIBIT “K”. The
same amount was then withdrawn by Margielou Alisbo as shown in the
passbook of which she has custody over. A copy of such is hereto
attached as EXHIBIT “L”. The said documents are proofs that the
amount of SIXTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY TWO
PESOS AND FOURTEEN CENTAVOS (Php 16, 552.14) that was
intended as payment for Philippine Ports Authority was withdrawn by
Margielou Alisbo. She however did not pay the said amount to
Judicial affidavit
Page 4 of 9
Philippine Ports Authority as there is no Official Receipt to that effect.

18. Q: What happened next if any?

A: I also found out that, on February 12, 2016, Margielou Alisbo,
prepared an “Accounts Payable Voucher” the amount of which is SIXTY
FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED THIRTY SIX PESOS AND
SIXTEEN CENTAVOS (Php 64,136.16). The same document is hereto
attached as EXHIBIT “M”.Also, there is a Check Voucher with the same
amount dated February 18, 2016, and the same is hereto attached as
EXHIBIT “N”. The same amount of SIXTY FOUR THOUSAND ONE
HUNDRED THIRTY SIX PESOS AND SIXTEEN CENTAVOS (Php
64,136.16) was thereafter deposited to BDO Bank account no.
006600121148. Proof of such is the deposit slip which is hereto attached
as EXHIBIT “O”. Afterwhich, the same amount was withdrawn by
Margielou Alisbo on February 18, 2016, as shown in the withdrawal slip.
Such is hereto attached as EXHIBIT “P”. Moreso, the passbook of which
she has custody over will also show that the same amount was
withdrawn. A copy of the same is hereto attached as EXHIBIT “Q”. The
whole amount of such, was supposed to be the payment for Philippine
Ports Authority. However, as shown in the Official Receipt issued by
(PPA) she only paid the amount of THIRTY THOUSAND PESOS (Php
30,000.00). The same Official Receipt is hereto attached as EXHIBIT “R.”

19. Q: What happened next if any?

A: Lastly, I found out that, on March 30, 2016, Margielou Alisbo,
prepared an “Accounts Payable Voucher” the amount of which is
SEVENTY THREE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED ONE PESOS AND
TWENTY SEVEN CENTAVOS (Php 73,901.27). The same document is
hereto attached as EXHIBIT “S”. Also, there is a Check Voucher with the
same amount dated March 31, 2016 and the same is hereto attached as
EXHIBIT “T”. The same amount of SEVENTY THREE THOUSAND
NINE HUNDRED ONE PESOS AND TWENTY SEVEN CENTAVOS
(Php 73,901.27) was thereafter deposited to BDO Bank account no.
006600121148. Proof of such is the deposit slip which is hereto attached
as EXHIBIT “U”. Afterwhich, an amount of TWO HUNDRED SIXTY
SIX THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY SEVEN PESOS AND
FIFTY FIVE CENTAVOS (Php 266,177.55) was withdrawn from the
same account no. by Margielou Alisbo on March 31, 2016, as shown in
the withdrawal slip. Such is hereto attached as EXHIBIT “V”. Moreso,
the passbook of which she has custody over will also show that the same
amount was withdrawn. A copy of the same is hereto attached as
EXHIBIT “W”. From such withdrawal, the amount of SEVENTY THREE
THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED ONE PESOS AND TWENTY SEVEN
CENTAVOS (Php 73,901.27) is supposed to be paid to the Philippine
Judicial affidavit
Page 5 of 9
Port Authority of which she never paid as there was no Official Receipt
to that effect is present.

20. Q: By the way, did you inform Margielou Alisbo, regarding the
matters that were found out by reason of the audit you’ve made as well
as your subsequent discoveries of unpaid amounts due to Philippine
Port Authority?
A: Yes. As a matter of fact, on July 18, 2016, our HR Manager Gerlie
Vallagomesa and I met up with her and I ask her to pay and return the
amounts of money she took from the company.

21. Q: Was there any statements made by her to disprove your findings,
if any?
A: Yes there was. In her counter-affidavit specifically in no. 12
thereof, she tried to justify herself by saying that “ the allegation that no
payment has been made to (PPA) since the same has not been reflected
in the ledger is of no basis as the ledger exhibited by the Complainant
and attached herein as “ANNEX “B” and “ANNEX “B-1” shows that a
payment was made last June 13, 20156 amounting to ONE HUNDRED
FIFTY THOUSAND NIN HUNDRED TWELVE PESOS AND SEVENTY
FIVE CENTAVOS (Php 150,912.75) the said SIXTEEN THOUSAND
FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY TWO PESOS AND FOURTEEN CENTAVOS
(Php 16, 552.14) is part of this payment, however AMTC did not
exhibited the other withdrawals made to complete the former amount.”
A copy of such counter affidavit is hereto attached as EXHIBITS “W” to
“W-4”

22. Q: What can you say to her statement, if any?

A: Her contention does not hold water as there was no record of
payment in the (PPA Ledger). The same is hereto attached as EXHIBIT
“X.” Furthermore, her claim that the amount SIXTEEN THOUSAND
FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY TWO PESOS AND FOURTEEN CENTAVOS
(Php 16, 552.14) was already part of the payment of ONE HUNDRED
FIFTY THOUSAND NIN HUNDRED TWELVE PESOS AND SEVENTY
FIVE CENTAVOS (Php 150,912.75) is a brazen lie as both transactions
were separate transactions as shown in the following documents. First,
an “Accounts Payable Voucher” dated June 4, 2015, which is hereto
attached as EXHIBIT “Y.” Second, Check Voucher with the same
amount dated June 12, 2015, and is hereto attached as EXHIBIT “Z”.
And the Official Receipt issued by Philippine Port Authority dated June
13, 2015 for the amount of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND NIN
HUNDRED TWELVE PESOS AND SEVENTY FIVE CENTAVOS (Php
150,912.75). The same Official Receipt is hereto attached as EXHIBIT
“Aa.” The fact that the two transactions has different entries as to the
Judicial affidavit
Page 6 of 9
control number, preparation date, check number, check date, check
amount, APV and SL Code, out rightly disproves her claim.

23. Q: What else was her defense, if there still any?

A: As regards the allegation that she only paid THIRTY THOUSAND
PESOS (Php 30,000.00) instead of SIXTY FOUR THOUSAND ONE
HUNDRED THIRTY SIX PESOS AND SIXTEEN CENTAVOS (Php
64,136.16), she again employed the same fraudulent machination by
reasoning out that the SIXTY FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED
THIRTY SIX PESOS AND SIXTEEN CENTAVOS (Php 64,136.16) was
paid on February 19, 2016 using the amount of ONE HUNDRED
TWENTY EIGHT THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED FORTY EIGHT PESOS
AND THIRTY TWO CENTVOS (Php 128,648.32) which according to
Margielou Alisbo was withdrawn from the bank. Such however has no
factual basis. The truth of the matter provides that the vouchers has
different entries as to the control number, preparation date, check
number, check date, check amount, APV, SL Code and the date it was
signed by a certain Mary Grace Pia. Proof of which are the “Accounts
Payable Voucher” and the Check Voucher. The same documents are
hereto attached as EXHIBITS “Ac.” And “Ad”. Moreover, the ONE
HUNDRED TWENTY EIGHT THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED FORTY
EIGHT PESOS AND THIRTY TWO CENTVOS (Php 128,648.32) was no
withdrawn from the bank. It was sent by AMTC Cebu Department to
Cagayan de Oro City Branch through a cross Check. The same check is
hereto attached as EXHIBIT “Ae”.

24. Q: What else was her defense, if there still any?

A: As regards the allegation that she did not pay the Philippine Port
Authority the amount of SEVENTY THREE THOUSAND NINE
HUNDRED ONE PESOS AND TWENTY SEVEN CENTAVOS (Php
73,901.27) despite the fact that she withdrew an amount of TWO
HUNDRED SIXTY SIX THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY
SEVEN PESOS AND FIFTY FIVE CENTAVOS (Php 266,177.55) which
should cover the amount to be paid to (PPA), she alleges in her counter
affidavit that, there were two official receipts issued on March 31, 2016
for SEVENTY ONE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SIXTY NINE PESOS
AND FORTY EIGHT CENTAVOS (Php 71,169.48) and TWO
HUNDRED EIGHTEEN THOUSAN FIVE HUNDRED NINETY THREE
PESOS AND EIGHTY SIX CENTAVOS (Php 218,593.86). She claimed
that both amounts already included the unexplained SEVENTY THREE
THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED ONE PESOS AND TWENTY SEVEN
CENTAVOS (Php 73,901.27). Such is unfounded as the truth provides
that, each amounts (Php 71,169.48), (Php 218,593.86) and (Php 73,901.27)
has different transactions and each has its own official receipt, except
Judicial affidavit
Page 7 of 9
the (Php 73,901.27). Proof of such is hereto attached as EXHIBITS “Af”
and “Ag”.

25. Q: Aside from meeting with her, do you have other proofs to show
that she was informed of such?
A: Yes. A Notice to Explain, was sent to her by the Human Resource
Department of Asian Marine Transport Corp. and was received by the
herein accused on July 18, 2019. The same document is hereto attached
and was marked as EXHIBIT “F” for the prosecution.

Manifestation: As the original copy of EXHIBIT “F” is here with the

witness, may we be allowed by this Honorable Court to compare the
records of this court regarding EXHIBIT “F” if the same is the true and
faithful photocopy of the original. Also, we also would like to ask from
this Honorable court that EXHIBIT “F” be remark as EXHIBIT “Ah” for
cronological order purposes.

26. Q: By the way, did you sent her a demand letter?

A: The company sent her a demand letter which she received on
August 1, 2016. The same letter is hereto attached and was already
marked as ANNEX "H" for the prosecution.

Manifestation: As the original copy of ANNEX “H” is here with the

witness, may we be allowed by this Honorable Court to compare the
records of this court regarding ANNEX “H” if the same is the true and
faithful photocopy of the original. Also, we also would like to ask from
this Honorable court that EXHIBIT “F” be remark as EXHIBIT “Ai” for
cronological order purposes.

27. Q: I have nothing more to ask, do you have something more to add?
A: None so far sir.

28. Q: Do you execute the foregoing truthfully and voluntarily?

A: Yes sir.

29. Q: Do you understand that if you are not telling the truth you will
be prosecuted for lying under oath?
A: Yes sir. I understand that I may be prosecuted if I lied under oath.

AFFIANT FURTHER SAYETH NAUGHT.

Judicial affidavit
Page 8 of 9
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature
this _________________, at Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines.

JULIET E. CATAYEN
Affiant
ID No. ______________

SUBCRIBED and sworn to before me this ____________, at

Cagayan de Oro, Philippines.

Doc. No.______ ;
Page No.______ ;
Book No.______ ;
Series of 2019

LAWYER’S ATTESTATION

I hereby declare that I conducted the examination of the above-

named witness in my office at Cagayan de Oro City.

Further certifying that I keep a record of the proceedings and that

the witness was not coached by me or my assistant or by any person
then present.

Done this ________________at Cagayan de Oro City.

COPY FURNISHED: (Registered mail due to distance)

Office of the City Prosecutor Office of the Solicitor General

Cagayan de Oro City 143 Amorsolo St., Legaspi Village,
Makati City

Received by: ___________ Registry Receipt __

Judicial affidavit
Page 9 of 9