Republic of the Philippines

Department of Justice
National Prosecution Service
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
San Andres, Santiago City

Jennifer Dela Cruz Gacita,

Complainant,
-versus- NPS Docket No. II-05-INV-20G-00176
For: “Unintentional Abortion”
Jovelyn Gallo Torres
Accused.
x-------------------------------------x

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )

CITY OF SANTIAGO ) S.c.
x----------------------------------------------x

COUNTER AFFIDAVIT

I, Jovelyn Gallo Torres, of legal age, Filipino and a resident Purok 5, Patul,
Santiago City, after having been sworn to in accordance with law, do hereby
depose and say:

1. That I am the respondent in a case stated above;

2. That by this affidavit, I categorically and vehemently deny in the strongest

terms the accusations or allegations in the said criminal complaint, the truth
of the matter is heretofore narrated for the consideration of the Honorable
prosecutor;

3. That on February 18, 2020, at around 11:00 a.m., after I washed Frederick
Baquirin (Inggo) and I’s clothes, I left the house. When I returned at around
2:30 P.M., I was accompanied by Alvin Corpuz and Glenna Genese whom I
asked to ferry me to our house. As I disembarked from the tricycle, I noticed
that someone is at the kitchen, I recognized that it was one of the drinking
buddies of Inggo who appears to be heavily drunk.;

4. I entered the house to look for Frederick (Inggo) I was surprised to see
Frederick Baquirin (Inggo) and Jennifer Gaceta together and clotheless from
waist down. When Inggo saw me he immediately bear hugged me so tight
and told Jennifer to put on her clothes.;

5. I confronted Inggo why he is naked with his neighbor Jennifer. I tried to free
myself from his bear hug but I cannot do anything because he was too
strong. I was taken aback when I felt someone pull my hair and when I
 glanced, I saw Jennifer forcefully pulling my hair. When I was able to free
myself from Inggo I also grabbed her hair and pulled it;

6. Inggo then managed to hold me again and brought me outside the House.
Jennifer then followed us and again tried to attack me but she was stopped
by my companions and was told to go home. Before she left she said “Sabi
ni Inggo hiwalay na daw kayo” and I answered back “Bakit ngarud nandito
ako? Katatapos ko lang maglaba kanina at dito pa naman ako natutulog.
Magsasamsam sana ko ng damit na sinampay, andito ka naman pala sa
kuwarto tinutulugan namin ni Inggo”;

7. When Jennifer left the vicinity, I gathered all my belongings and left the
house because I felt extremely angry of the betrayal made by Inggo on me.;

8. While I admit that there was a commotion between me and Jennifer which
catapulted to the point where hairs were pulled, I only did it to defend
myself. The only physical action I did was the pulling of her hair and
nothing else.;

9. Now she claims that because of the incident, her unborn baby was aborted
and that I should be the one to blame. With all due respect, there are many
inconsistencies in her complaint in the barangay and in her affidavit;

10. In her complaint lodged before the Barangay, she alleged that I pulled her
hair and that she suffered physical injuries because of it. There was no
mention that I directly or indirectly inflicted violence against the womb of
the complainant.;

11. In the “sinumpaang salaysay ng reklamo” executed on July 23, 2020, after
more than five months from the date of the incident that she remembered she
fell on the floor on her buttocks. Also at that span of time she did not
remember that her baby was aborted. In her affidavit alone, the case should
be dismissed as the affidavit does not constitute an offense for unintentional
abortion.;

12.Even assuming that the baby was aborted, respondent cannot be faulted for it
because there is no direct evidence or indication that the abortion was made
because of the incident on February 18, 2020. Based on her medical
certificate dated February 19, 2020, submitted before your Honorable
Office, the diagnosis was for “Multiple Abrasions secondary to alleged
mauling: 1. Frontal Area 2. Anterior neck right”. There was no mention of
any injury she suffered where she fell on the floor on her buttocks. She was
again subjected two more ultra sound examination but there was no mention
or allegation that she is experiencing abdominal pains or vaginal bleeding
which may result to abortion. In addition, she claims that on the same day
she went to the hospital to have a physical checkup but the medical
 certificate stated that she was treated only on February 19, 2019, a very
obvious inconsistency to her affidavit. The abortion may also have occurred
because she had sexual intercourse with Inggo while she is pregnant;

13.Assuming arguendo that there was an abortion, the wrong should not be
pointed to the direction of the respondent as there is no direct proof that the
pulling of the hair attributed to the abortion of the unborn child. In one of the
case decided by the Supreme Court it stated “The prosecution’s success in
proving that Lydia committed the crime of direct assault does not necessarily
mean that the same physical force she employed on Gemma also resulted in
the crime of unintentional abortion. There is no evidence on record to prove
that the slapping and pushing of Gemma by Lydia that occurred on July 17,
1981 was the proximate cause of the abortion. While the medical certificate
of Gemma’s attending physician, Dr. Susan Jaca (Dr. Jaca), was presented to
the court to prove that she suffered an abortion, there is no data in the
document to prove that her medical condition was a direct consequence of
the July 17, 1981 incident. It was therefore vital for the prosecution to
present Dr. Jaca since she was competent to establish a link, if any, between
Lydia’s assault and Gemma’s abortion. Without her testimony, there is no
way to ascertain the exact effect of the assault on Gemma’s abortion. Xxx
xxxxxx It is worth stressing that Gemma was admitted and confined in a
hospital for incomplete abortion on August 28, 1981, which was 42 days
after the July 17, 1981 incident. This interval of time is too lengthy to prove
that the discharge of the fetus from the womb of Gemma was a direct
outcome of the assault. Her bleeding and abdominal pain two days after the
said incident were not substantiated by proof other than her testimony.
Thus, it is not unlikely that the abortion may have been the result of other
factors.”1

14.That I am executing this affidavit attesting to the veracity and truthfulness of

the foregoing narration of facts for the consideration of the honorable
prosecutor to warrant the dismissal of the complaint filed against me for
being baseless and unfounded.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 17th day of August
2020 in the City of Santiago, Philippines.

Jovelyn Gallo Torres

Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 17th day of August 2020 in
the City of Santiago, Philippines.
1
Lydia C. Gelig versus People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 173150, July 28, 2010
Copy furnished:

Jennifer Dela Cruz Gacita

Purok 5, Patul, Santiago City