Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
Branch 126, Makati City
mctc1mak126@judiciary.gov,ph/869-353-38/0961-5293-794

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,

CRIM. CASE No.: M-MKT-22-01683-CR

-versus - For: ARBITRARY DETENTION

PCI GIDEON INES, SPO3 PO3 GLEN MARVIN M.

JEMCIE F. ACOSTA, SPO3 GALLERO and
ALEJANDRO D. DEVALID,
SPO2 ANTHONY S. ABABA,
PO3 REYNALDO G. AGUSTIN,

PO1 CHRISTOPHER I. UBINA,

Accused.

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

JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT OF PLTCOL GIDEON INES, JR.

Taken on April 2, 2024 by Atty. NOLEN B. ENDAYA at the
latter’s Office in Makati City

In lieu of the oral testimony in court of PLTCOL GIDEON INES, JR., one
of the accused in this case, his Judicial Affidavit is being offered pursuant to A.M.
12-8-8-SC, known as the Judicial Affidavit Rule, and the herein counsel
ATTY. NOLEN ENDAYA, moves to offer in evidence the testimony of PLTCOL
GIDEON INES, JR., through this Judicial Affidavit, for the following purposes to
prove that:

1. The Makati City Police Station, Philippine National Police Station with
office address at Ayala Avenue Extension corner Yakal St., Makati City
received a complaint for Extortion and Swindling/Estafa from a certain
complainant known as Zhifeng Tang and an entrapment ensued;

2. That at the entrapment the private complainant was present and he was
only invited at that time in SEDA Hotel;

3. That the private complainant was only arrested when he presented a Gun
(Pistol Caliber 40) without presenting any License to Own Firearm and
License to carry Firearms outside residence (PTCFOR);

4. That proper procedure and protocols for warrantless arrest were observed
by the arresting officers;
 5. That there was a legal arrest of the person of Mr. Rudthen Mendoza.

6. That he will also identify certain documents and pieces of evidence and
other facts in relation to the apprehension that was conducted by said
police officers.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

I, PLTCOL GIDEON INES, JR., of legal age, married, Filipino and living
at 2406 Bato St., Tondo, Manila, one of the accused in this case, state under oath as
follows:

I am executing this Judicial Affidavit in Tagalog and was translated to

English in which I also understand,

The person examining me is ATTY. NOLEN B. ENDAYA with law office

address at 1514-A Ponte St., Brgy. Singkamas, Makati City 1204, Philippines. My
Judicial Affidavit is being taken at the above-mentioned place in the presence of
my companions. The questions are asked in the English Language but are
translated in Tagalog which I speak and fully understand.

I am answering his questions fully conscious that I do so under oath and may
face criminal liability for false testimony and perjury.

OFFER OF TESTIMONY

THIS Affidavit is being offered to prove all of the above-mentioned

purposes.

It is respectfully prayed that this Judicial Affidavit of PLTCOL GIDEON

INES, JR. be admitted as the Direct Examination of the Witness in order to
expedite the proceeding.

DIRECT EXAMINATION QUESTIONS

1. Q: Mr. Witness kindly state your name and other personal circumstances for
the record.
A: I am PLTCOL GIDEON INES, JR., 52 years old, married and
presently residing at 2406 Bato St., Tondo, Manila.

2. Q: You are reminded that your answers to the questions to be asked of you
in this Judicial Affidavit are being made under oath and that you may face
criminal liability for perjury or false testimony with respect to statements that
you shall make here.
Are you willing to proceed with the talking of the Judicial Affidavit?
A: Yes Sir, I am fully aware of that and I am willing to proceed with my
testimony.
3. Q: For the record, can you please state your current position and place of
assignment?

A: I am PLTCOL GIDEON INES, JR., currently assigned at

Mandaluyong City Police Station, Philippine National Police as Assistant
Chief of Police for Administration and I am the former Assistant Chief of
Police for Operation and Chief, Criminal Investigation and Detective
Management Section of Makati PNP.

4. Q: How long have you been in service with the Philippine National Police?
A: 27 years, Sir.

5. Q: As a Former Assistant Chief of Police for Operation (ACOPO) and Chief,

Criminal Investigation and Detective Management Section of Makati PNP,
what are your principal duties and functions?

A: As a former Assistant Chief of Police for Operation and Chief, Criminal

Investigation and Detective Management Section of Makati PNP, I am task
to investigate all forms of violations of law and criminality and act on any
criminal complaints brought in Makati PNP.

6. Q: Do you know who is the private complainant in this case?

A: Yes sir. He is Mr. Rudthen Mendoza, who was arrested last September
28, 2018 for carrying a .40-caliber pistol without carrying with him any
license to own firearms and license to carry firearms outside residence
(PTCFOR) nor he have presented any documents relative to the possession
of the mentioned gun.

7. Q: Where and how did you meet him?

A: We met him at SEDA Hotel during our entrapment operation in the said
hotel, and because he was with the persons who are subjects of our
entrapment operation, we invited him to come with us for further
investigation.

8. Q: Did Mr. Rudthen Mendoza agree with your invitation?

A: Yes sir, in fact he voluntarily enters the police car without any handcuffs
as can be seen in the CCTV Footage that they presented before this
honorable court.

9. Q: Do you have any proof that you did not arrest him at SEDA Hotel?
and if you do, what is it?
A: Yes sir, and our evidence sir is the same CCTV Footage that was
presented before by the prosecution.

10.Q: What is in this CCTV Footage if you remember?

A: In the said CCTV Footages, you can see that the private complainant was
not arrested. He was walking freely, and you can see that he voluntarily
entered or rode the car without any handcuffs or any restriction that would
show that he was arrested.
 11.Q: You made mention of an entrapment operation, was this a legitimate
operation?
A: Yes, Sir, it was a legitimate police operation.

12.Q: Do you have any proof or documents to show that this operation was a
legit/legitimate operation?
A: Yes sir, we have submitted the complaint of Zhifeng Tang and Elizabeth
Rivera which caused us to conduct case build-up and entrapment operation.
We also coordinated the said operation with Quezon City Police District as
evidenced by Coordination Form submitted to QCPD prior to the operation.

13.Q: You made mention of a complaint of persons you named Zhifeng Tang
and Elizabeth Rivera. You also mentioned of a Coordination form submitted
to QCPD prior to the operation as you alleged. Did you submit the same to
this Honorable Court and can you identify the same if presented to you?
A: Yes sir. We submitted all of it to the Honorable Court.

14.Q: I am showing to you a document, can you tell us what is the relation of
this document to the documents that you have mentioned?
A: This is the copy of the complaint of Mr. Zhifeng Tang, sir.

15.Q: How were you able to know that it is Mr. Zhifeng Tang’s complaint?
A: I was personally present sir when he executes the said complaint and I
personally seen him signing the same.

16.Q: You said you personally saw the execution and signing of the complaint
of Mr. Zhifeng Tang. Are you implying that you have personal knowledge on
the execution of said document?
A: Yes sir. I have personal knowledge of the execution and signing of the
said complaint of Mr. Zhifeng Tang as I am present that time.

Manifestation: Your honor the witness Identified the Complaint of Mr. Zhifeng
Tang and he manifested that he has personal knowledge of the execution of the
complaint. Likewise, I would like to manifest that the same is already marked
during the pre-trial.

17.Again, I am showing to you another document can you tell us what is the
relation of this document to the documents you made mentioned earlier?
A: This is the copy of the complaint of Elizabeth Rivera, sir.

18.Q: How were you able to know that it is Elizabeth Rivera’s complaint?
A: I was also present sir when she executes the said complaint and I
personally seen her signing the same.

19.Q: Again, I am showing you a document, can you tell us what is the relation
of this document to any of the documents you have previously mentioned?
 A: This is the copy of the Coordination Form that we submitted with QCPD
prior to our entrapment operation at SEDA Hotel, sir.

20.Q: How did you know about it?

A: It is part of our standard operating procedure and as a team leader of the
operation I would always check and see to it that everything is in order
before we proceed with our operation.

21.Q: Is it not a part of your so called Standard Operating Procedure that you
need to coordinate with the place of operation?
A: No sir, it is not part of our standard operating procedure.

22.Q: You said in your answer in question no. 7, that you only invited
Mr. Rudthen Mendoza, but why he said that he was arrested and can you tell
us where and when he was arrested?
A: Sir, we only invited him to come with us when we were at SEDA Hotel.
We never arrested him there. We informed him that we are inviting him to
ask him and clarify some questions. He was arrested for illegal possession of
Firearm (.40-Caliber Pistol) because of his failure to present any license to
own firearms nor license to carry firearms nor mission order, which left us
no choice but to arrest him and he was only arrested at the police station
after giving him time to present his documents relative to the possession of
his .40-Caliber Pistol.

23.Q: So, where did you make the arrest of this person?
A: We arrest him when we are already at the police station.

24.Q: Where did he surrender the .40 Caliber Pistol that you are telling us?
A: He surrendered his firearm upon arrest of Dina Castro and company at
SEDA Hotel.

25.Q: So why did you not arrest him at SEDA Hotel when he presented his .40-
Caliber Pistol?
A: As courtesy sir because he presented an NBI Id sir and we waited for
him to present his documents which he was not able to produce.

26.Q: What is the reason for his arrest?

A: We arrested him for Illegal Possession of Firearms because he does not
have with him any License and PTCFOR nor PTCFOR-LEA, required for
possessing a .40-caliber pistol.

27.Q: So, are you saying that your action taken was only due to performance of a
lawful duty?
A: Yes sir. We just merely performed our duty and we did not perform it
with any ill motives of whatsoever. We only implement the law for that
matter, sir.

28.Q: How did you arrest him?

 A: I personally did not arrest him but as a standard procedure, the person
who made the arrest appraise him of his rights under the Constitution, frisked
him and he was handcuffed at the police station.

29.Q: What did you call that kind of arrest you made to the person of Mr.
Mendoza?
A: His arrest sir, is one of that we called in flagrante delicto arrest, because
he was caught possessing a Firearm without any license with him.

30.Is handcuff necessary and is it a proof that a person is/was arrested?

A: Yes, sir. It is necessary for the protection of the arresting officer and to
avoid the arrested person from escaping. Also, it is a proof that he is under
arrest.

31.Q: Do you mean to say that if you had arrested the private complainant in
SEDA Hotel, you should have put him in handcuffed before bringing him to
the police station?
A: Yes, sir. It is part of the standard procedure sir.

32.Q: You said you had arrested Dina Castro and company, did you handcuffed
them when you arrested them?
A: Yes sir, we did.

33.Did Mr. Rudthen Mendoza present any Identification Card for his identity as
an NBI Agent at that time?
A: Yes, he presented an NBI Id, sir.

34.Q: Is it not a valid proof that he is already authorized to carry firearms such
as the .40-caliber pistol that you said he surrendered to you since he is part of
a law enforcement agency?

A: No sir. Under the firearms law even a law enforcement agent is required
to have a License to Own Firearms (LTOF) and Permit to Carry Firearms
outside of resident (PTCFOR) if the subject firearm is privately owned by
the agent. And, if the firearm is owned and issued by the government
agency, a mission order (MO) or Letter Order (LO) is required together with
the Permit to Carry for Law Enforcement Agents (PTCFOR-LEA).

35.Q: Do you have any proof or documents to show to prove your statement?
A: Yes sir. I have with me is the certified copy of R.A. 10519 stating that it
is the Chief PNP or his duly authorized representative is authorized to issue
a Permit to Carry Firearms outside residence and that under 7.9 of the
Implementing Rules and Regulation of R.A. 10519, it is stated that it is a
must for the Members of the PNP, AFP and other Law Enforcement
Agencies to apply for PTCFOR-LEA, in order to be authorized to carry the
firearms outside of residence.

Manifestation: Your honor the witness is presenting a document which is a copy

of R.A. 10519 which confirms his statements.
 36.Q: Are you saying or telling us that the firearms should always be
accompanied as the case may be by an LTOF/PTC/PTCFOR-LEA/
MR/ARE/MO/LO whenever anyone would own or bring a gun?
A: Yes, sir.

37.Q: Why did you not accept the Certification from the NBI Director that he is
authorized to carry his firearms?
A: He did not present any certification of such at that time and what was
required by R.A. 10519, is LTOPF, PTC, PTCFOR-LEA, MR, ARE, MO,
and LO, the Certification issued by its head of Office is not among the
documents mentioned to validly carry a gun outside of his residence.

38.Q: Is the mentioned .40 -Caliber pistol a government issued gun or privately
owned by Mr. Rudthen Mendoza?
A: It is privately owned by Mr. Mendoza sir.

39.Q: Do you have any proof that the same is privately owned by Mr. Mendoza
and if you do, what is it?
A: Yes sir. Our proof is the certification from the PNP explosive and
firearm division that we already submitted to the court, showing that Mr.
Mendoza owns the subject gun.

Manifestation: Your honor, I would like to manifest that the mentioned

certification from PNP Explosive and Firearms Division was already submitted
and marked during the pre-trial.

40.According to the private complainant there was an order of release from the
prosecutor but he remains to be locked in the prison cell and he was only
released on Monday if I am not mistaken. Why is he not released
immediately?
A: He was not released sir because the order for his release was made after
office hours and such release is still required to undergo a certain standard
operating procedure before he can be released by the warden and such
procedure is not our own doing.

41.Q: Can you tell us the procedure required before you can release a detained
person?
A: As an SOP, before the release of a detained person from police custody
after posting bail and/or presenting a Release Order, the duty warden will
have to verify first in MTC and RTC Courts if the said detained person have
other pending Warrant of Arrest before his release and after that, it is the only
time the detain person can be released.

42. Q: Are you saying that main reason of the delayed release of Mr. Rudthen
Mendoza was due to this procedure or protocol and that it is not your intention
of such delayed of his release?
 A: Yes sir.

43. Do you have something more to add to your testimony?

A: None for now sir.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this _____

day of __________________ at _________________, Philippines.

PLTCOL GIDEON INES, JR.

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME, a notary public in and

for __________ this ____ day of ______________. Affiant personally came and
appeared with ___________________ issued by _______________________,
bearing his photograph and signature, known to me as the same person who
personally signed the foregoing instrument before me and avowed under penalty of
law to the whole truth of the contents of said instrument.

Notary Public

Doc. No. _______;

Page No. _______;
Book No. ______;
Series of 2024.

ATTESTATION

I, NOLEN B. ENDAYA, of legal age, Filipino, with postal address 1514-A

Ponte St., Brgy. Singkamas, Makati City after being duly sworn depose and say:

1. I was the one who conducted the examination of the complainant P. CINSP.
GIDEON INES, JR.at my aforementioned office in Makati City;

2. I have faithfully recorded or caused to be recorded the questions I asked and the
corresponding answer that the witness gave;
3. I nor any other person then present or assisting him or coached the witness
regarding his answers;

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ____ day of

________________ at ___________________.

ATTY. NOLEN B. ENDAYA

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME, a notary public in and

for ___________ this _____ day of ___________________. Affiant personally
came and appeared with IBP ROLL No. 76546 issued by the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (IBP), bearing his photograph and signature, known to me as the same
person who personally signed the foregoing instrument before me and avowed
under penalty of law to the whole truth of the contents of said instrument.

Notary Public

Doc. No. _______;

Page No. _______;
Book No. ______;
Series of 2024