Counter-affidavit Leonen Ganay (falsification)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR DAGUPAN CITY EDWIN SALAZAR LEONEN Complainant, -versusCAROLYN PADAYAO LEONEN and LLOYD CORPUZ GANAY Respondents.

NPS –I-10-INV-14D-00177 For: FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENT

COUNTER–AFFIDAVIT We: CAROLYN PADAYAO LEONEN, of legal age, Filipino, married to the above-named complainant but separated-in-fact, and a resident of #23 Nibaliw Sur, Bautista, Pangasinan; and LLOYD GANAY, of legal age, Filipino, single and a resident of #25 Binday, San Fabian, Pangasinan under oath, depose and state that:

1.

We are the respondents in the above-entitled case which is pending before this Honorable Office;

2.

We strongly deny the said false, misleading and fabricated accusations and allegations by the private complainant, charging us of FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS;

As to the alleged falsification of public document: 3.

For falsification of public document suit to prosper, the complainant must prove that the respondent/s falsified a document by committing any of the following acts: a. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric;

b. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so participate; c. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other than those in fact made by them; d. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts; e. Altering true dates; f. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its meaning; g. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original document when no such original exists, or including in such a copy a statement contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine original; or h. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry, or official book (Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code). 4.

The sole basis of the complainants’ charges against us is the alleged falsified Certificate of Live Birth of Chloe Nehemiah Ganay--- that Respondent Carolyn Padayao Leonen, his wife, “misrepresented herself to be only as Carolyn Padayao Leonen although her signature is reflective of Carloyn Padayao Leonen as shown in Box 22 thereof” (quoted from paragraph 6 of herein complainant’s affidavit-complaint) xxx “I am therefore filing criminal complaints for Falsification of a Public Document against both Carolyn Padayao Leonen and Lloyd Corpuz Ganay for giving false information in the Certificate of Live Birth of Chloe Nehemiah Ganay”;

5.

The participation of the respondents in the alleged falsification of the said Certificate of Birth of Chloe Nehemia Ganay does not even well-established in their Complaint-Affidavit. Complainant’s allegations as contained in his complaint-affidavit are replete with hysterics and short of the required ultimate facts that a complaint of procedural and substantive merit entails. By material allegations are meant those without which the complainant would have no cause of action;

6.

If it is for the fact that Respondent Carolyn Padayao Leonen misrepresented herself to be only as “Carolyn

Counter-Affidavit Leonen v. Leonen, et al.

Page 2 of 4

Padayao” as appearing in the Certificate of Live Birth of her daughter, she was not the one who entered/typed the name Carolyn Padayao in the said Certificate of Live Birth, not even his co-respondent Lloyd Ganay; 7.

Moreover, assuming en arguendo, that they were the ones who supplied such information, there is no law or any regulation which prohibits the usage of maiden name.

8.

As well-established above, we committed no act or omission which could have given rise to the crime of falsification of public document as described under Revised Penal Code. It is even more compelling to dismiss the instant case outright considering that the ComplaintAffidavit is very much vague and without any basis in fact and in law which cannot be the basis of any valid finding of probable cause;

9.

It is therefore prayed that the complaint affidavit filed by herein complainant be dismissed outright for without merit and no probable cause can be deduced from the allegations therein stated;

10.

We are executing this counter-affidavit to attest to the truth of all the foregoing and for all legal intents and purposes it may serve.

Respectfully submitted. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this ____ day of June 2014, in Dagupan City, Pangasinan, Philippines.

CAROLYN PADAYAO LEONEN Affiant SSS ID No. 02-1060087-6

LLYOD CORPUZ GANAY Affiant Driver’s License No. AO5-11004164

Assisted by: A.F. Bustamante Law Office Rm. B-319 Lopez Bldg. Counter-Affidavit Leonen v. Leonen, et al.

Page 3 of 4

Session Rd., Baguio City SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ____ day of June, 2014 in Dagupan City, Pangasinan, Philippines. I hereby further certify that I have personally examined herein affiants, and I am fully convinced that they gave their statement freely and that they understood the same. CAROLYN PADAYAO LEONEN Affiant SSS ID No. 02-1060087-6

LLYOD CORPUZ GANAY Affiant Driver’s License No. AO5-11004164

_______________________________________ Administering Officer

Counter-Affidavit Leonen v. Leonen, et al.

Page 4 of 4