Republic of the Philippines

Department of Justice
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
San Jose, Antique

WINNIE D. CEPE

Complainant,
-versus- Docket No.: ___________
For: Violation of R.A 9262
DARELL ROY O. BERIN Violence Against Women
Respondent. and their Children

x-------------------------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT – AFFIDAVIT

I, WINNIE D. CEPE, of legal age, Filipino, married, and a

resident of Poblacion 4, Hamtic, Antique, Philippines, after having
been duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and state:

1. I am the same person who is the complainant in the instant

case;
2. I know the person of Darell Roy O. Berin, being the
FATHER of my minor child Marielle Rose C. Berin and who is
currently residing at Poblacion 1, Hamtic, Antique, Philippines
where he may be served with summons, notices and
processes;
3. That we were in a romantic relationship since I was in fourth
year high school;
4. That out of the said relationship, I got pregnant with his
child. Our daughter is Marielle Rose C. Berin who was
born on October 15, 2004. Our daughter is 16 years old.
Copy of her Certificate of Live Birth is hereto attached as
Annex”___”;
5. That we went our separate ways when our daughter was

1
 around five years old;
6. That sometime around 2008 or 2009, the respondent did not
show any interest or care to her. He never communicated
with her nor did he give any form of support;
7. That he only started giving the amount of P2,000.00 when
our child was already in Grade 1;
8. That there are times when our child went to the
respondent’s house hoping to receive her allowance only to
be told by the wife, Kimberly M. Berin that they do not have
the money to give yet. Those instances resulted to my child
feeling embarrassed and neglected to the point that’s she no
longer wants to go to her father’s house.
9. That it hurts me as a mother that our child experienced this
kind of treatment especially coming from her own father.
The support legally intended for our daughter is an
obligation on the part of the respondent. The said obligation
should not be made dependent on the will of the father
whether he likes it or not. Our child rightly deserves a
sufficient support.
10. That when our child was _____ years old, I asked for an
adjustment of her allowance as I can no longer afford her
expenses on my own.
11. That we appeared before the barangay where I reluctantly
agreed to the compromise agreement as Darell was only willing
to give Php 5,000 when he was onboard and only what he
wants to give when he is not onboard. Using his words, “Kon
rudya ako di mag demand”, copy of the compromise agreement
is hereto attached as Annex “___”;

12. That at that time I did not have a stable source of

income, I was forced to agree to the said agreement even if it
seems that I along my child was at the mercy of Darell,
considering that it was only his offer that was considered

2
 especially when he was not onboard as it was clearly seen that
the amount of support is based only on his will;
(Insert Kim nga gina hambal na ngita-an porsyentuhan para
sa allowance but si Winnie mabayad ka porsyento)
13. Despite this agreement, the respondent failed to comply
with his undertakings because he failed to consistently give
the amount agreed upon as a support;
14. The very recent incidents which forced me to
continuously demand for my child’s monthly financial
support was the fact that Darell did not give any thing for
several straight months to support Emem despite my pleas.
His failure to consistently give the support intended for
Emem was disguised under the alibi that his salary was
delayed. He was onboard starting July 2019 until June or
August 2020. Since he was onboard, he only started giving
Emem a financial support last March 11, 2020 upon my
repeated demands, which payment was applicable for the
month of December 2019. Below is my recorded
computation as to the inconsistent and insufficient
amount he sent for our daughter and the date of payment
and for what month the same is applicable.

(Insert table here)

This record shows his utter disregard for the needs of our child
and his blatant unwillingness to comply with his obligation as a
father to Emem. His act of withholding the support intended
for Emem is a form of economic abuse that is punishable under
R.A. 9262. There was never any sense of concern that my
child and I felt during those months of non-support. Never did
the respondent reached out to me nor to my child. Those
months that my daughter did not receive any support from her
father made me experience some sleepless nights and mental
anguish because I know I have to make ends meet day by day.
3
 I am a Baranggay Secretary and my monthly salary is only Php
4,900.00 less my honorarium loan of Php 2,700.00 which is
very insufficient to the needs of my daughter. I was left with
no choice but to do anything that I can in order to provide for
our daughter who is now in her Junior High School.
15. I called his attention to the Baranggay for me to be able
to repeatedly remind the respondent that our child needs his
support and to reiterate and put emphasis of my difficulty in
raising Emem as her needs continue to grow. However,
there was no settlement.

16. I was constrained to seek legal assistance from Atty.

Raemman Maniba Lagrada who immediately assisted me by
preparing and sending a Demand Letter requesting to enter
to another agreement for the amount Eight Thousand (P
8,000.00) Pesos which shall be the amount to be given when
Darell is onboard and Four Thousand Pesos (P 4,000.00)
when he is not on board, copy of the said letter is hereto
attached and marked as Annex “___”;

17. That my lawyer exhausted all possible remedies to avoid

any litigation by making a compromise agreement as
abovestated but to his dismay, Darell keeps on lowering the
monthly amount compared to what I offered in the
compromise agreement. Attached hereto is their counter-
proposal, see ANNEX “__”. During those two meetings with
my lawyer, all they did was to ask for the lowering of the
amount of support, (or for the lack of better term, “tanan na
lang gid gin-ayo nanda sa abogado ko”), repeatedly saying
that he has no money to give for Emem’s support. He even
asked for the installment of the “arrears” (the payable
monthly support due in the amount of Fifteen Thousand
Pesos (Php15,000.00) because according to him, he has no
money. My lawyer and I considered it. However, this claim
by Darell was contrary to his lifestyle where he managed to
buy a “NEW FORD ECOSPORT”. It really pains me to
4
 think that Darell strongly says that he lacks money and
resources to consistently and sufficiently provide for Emem’s
needs and comply his obligations as a Father but in truth
and in fact, he can even afford to buy his new car. Thus, it
is clearly shown that his daughter is out of his
priority.
18. That his act of continuous failure to give consistent
support since the year 2011 is tantamount to economic
abuse which is defined under R.A 9262 or Violence Against
Women and their Children as:

"Economic abuse" refers to acts that make or attempt

to make a woman financially dependent which includes, but is
not limited to the following:

1. Withdrawal of financial support or preventing the

victim from engaging in any legitimate
profession, occupation, business or activity,
except in cases wherein the other spouse/partner
objects on valid, serious and moral grounds as
defined in Article 73 of the Family Code;

xxxxxxxxx.”

Further, RA 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children

Act of 2004) holds the father criminally liable if he fails to support his
children, specifically Sec. 5 (e)(2) of the same which provides that:

“Depriving or threatening to deprive the woman or her children

of financial support legally due her or her family, or
deliberately providing the woman’s children insufficient
financial support”.

19. The respondent further proved his utter unwillingness to

provide for Emem after they presented their counter-proposal
and I was not amenable with his terms and conditions. I
decided to pursue legal action because it is very clear to me that
the respondent is shortchanging my child’s support legally
intended for her. That there is no willingness to give sufficient
support for my child.
5
 20. That upon hinting that I am decided to bring the matter to
the court, they set for a third appointment to my lawyer last
November 15, 2020 at three in the afternoon, and offered to
pay Fifteen Thousand (Php 15,000.00) outrightly. This time, I
instructed my lawyer not to accept the same because they are
just trying to avoid litigation when in fact, the same could have
been settled amicably during the first two meetings in my
lawyer’s office. Thus, the offer of Fifteen Thousand (Php
15,000.00) was another proof that the respondent has sufficient
money to provide for child support but blatantly refuses to do
so.

21. That on November 17, 2020 at past two in the afternoon

and later in the evening, I was repeatedly informed by the
Barangay that the respondent and his family want me to receive
the Fifteen Thousand (Php 15,000.00) and want the same to be
certified. I strongly refused because there was no settlement
for sufficient child support between the respondent and I.
Those two instances are a form of harassment which is causing
me so much emotional and mental stress.

22. The next day November 18, 2020, the same thing
happened in the morning of that day, the respondent’s wife
called the Barangay Captain of Poblacion 4, Hamtic, Antique,
and forcing me to receive the same amount of Fifteen Thousand
(Php 15,000.00) which I previously refused. The wife even
asked the Barangay Captain to issue a certification showing
receipt of the same. For the same reason, I refused to receive
the money. All these actions taken by the respondent and his
wife were all for the purpose of pressuring me to agree with
their terms while shortchanging the monthly support due to my
daughter. It is nothing short of making me stupid and placing
me under their mercy. I cannot agree to such terms when I
know that my minor daughter’s rights are being neglected,
abused and violated.
NOTE: CITE GID TWO POINTS.

ANG EMOTIONAL AND ECONOMIC ABUSE PA KAY EMEM

THEN KAY WINNIE

23. That this criminal complaint is without prejudice of filing a

separate civil action for support; and
6
 24. That I cause the preparation of this affidavit to support
my complaint.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand

this at ,
Philippines.

_____________________
Complainant-Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this

day of November 2020.

Prosecutor

7
8
9