Republic of the Philippines]

C I T Y O F D I P O L O G ]S.S.
X====================/

JOINT JUDICIAL COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT

[This Joint Judicial Affidavit was prepared and taken
before Atty. Peter Y. Co at his Law Office located at 027
P. Burgos Street, Barra, Dipolog City]

WE, KYLIE MAE EDRALIN-SULASULA, 26 yrs old, married to Bryan L.

Sulasula,; AFREDO B. EDRALIN, 54 yrs. old, married to Elvira Balag Edralin,
and, KYLE JOHN A. EDRALIN, a minor 17 yrs. old, single, all Filipinos and
residents of Solinog, Calamba, Misamis Occidental, fully aware and
conscious that I am under oath, and with full knowledge that if my answers
are false, I can be subjected to criminal liability, deposeth and sayeth:

That we can read and understand English, but we are humbly

requesting that the questions and answers be translated in the Bisayan
dialect for convenience and better appreciation of its import.

1.Q: You have been charged with Carnapping by a certain Luceline

Mangapis Edralin, do you know her?
A: Yes, sir. She is the wife of Rolando B. Edralin who was murdered last
March 22, 2018 at Purok 6, Barangay Don Bernardo A. Neri, Calamba,
Misamis Occidental.

2.Q: But in her Judicial Affidavit dated April 26, 2018, she swore that she
was married?.
A: She is lying, sir. Our [insofar as Kylie Mae and Kyle John] father [my
brother insofar as Alfredo] died already last March 22, 2018.1

3.Q: How are you related to Rolando B. Edralin or the complainant Luceline
Mangapis Edralin?
A: ROLANDO B. EDRALIN is the father of respondents KYLIE MAE EDRALIN
SULASULA and KYLE JOHN A. EDRALIN, in his first marriage with Marwen
Antonio Edralin who died last April 9, 2007, at Cebu City.

ROLANDO B. EDRALIN subsequently married another woman, Luceline

Mangapis, the herein-complainant. So, she is the stepmother of
respondents KYLIE MAE EDRALIN-SULASULA and KYLE JOHN A. EDRALIN.

1
Annex “1” = Death Certificate of Rolando B. Edralin, died last March 22, 2018.

1
Respondent ALFREDO B. EDRALIN is the full-blood brother of ROLANDO B.
EDRALIN. Hence, respondent ALFREDO B. EDRALIN is the uncle of
respondents KYLIE MAE EDRALIN-SULASULA and KYLE JOHN A. EDRALIN.

4.Q: Has the murder of your father/brother , ROLANDO B. EDRALIN been

SOLVED?
A: The National Bureau of Investigation [NBI] had filed a criminal case for
MURDER before the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Misamis
Occidental at Oroquieta City against the following: 1. The gunman, a certain
ALEJANDRO IMAN; 2. LUCELINE MANGAPIS EDRALIN, the herein-
complainant-wife; 3. RAUL M. VILLAGANTOL, who is the paramour of
Luceline M. Edralin.2

5.Q: So, his own wife, the herein-complainant, LUCELINE M. EDRALIN was
accused of complicity in the murder of ROLANDO B. EDRALIN?
A: Yes, sir, together with her paramour, and a hired gunman.

6.Q: What can you say to the claim of LUCELINE M. EDRALIN that you
accordingly stole last April 8, 2018, motor vehicles that she accordingly
acquired during her marriage with her late husband Rolando Baliao Edralin,
as follows:

1. ISUZU truck Elf, color Black, bearing plate no. KEU 922.
2. One [1] unit Kawasaki, color black, bearing plate no. 090809.
3. One [1] unit Suzuki Raider, 150.
4. One Big Bike 1000cc. motorcycle.
5. Isuzu Elf Cargo truck.

A: We vehemently deny as false and a lie the accusation against us.

FIRST: There are no proofs like certificates of registration or documents of

sale over these motor vehicles. As complainant for Carnapping, it is
incumbent upon her to prove ownership of the motor vehicle. This is an
important element of the crime. The best proof will be the certificates of
registration. Allegations are not proofs.

SECOND: There is no proof of the existence of the motor vehicle because

no certificate of registration was presented. Neither is there a picture of the
motor vehicle.

2
Annex “2” – NBI Letter-endorsement of a Complaint for Murder dated April 20, 2018 to the Provincial
Prosecutor of Misamis Occidental, against Raul M. Villagantol, Alejandro Iman and Luceline M. Edralin,

2
THIRD: Complainant cannot legally claim that the motor vehicles belonged
to her, thus the element in carnapping/theft that the property must belong
to another is absent insofar as the respondents are concerned.
Respondents KYLIE MAE EDRALIN-SULASULA and KYLE JOHN A. EDRALIN
have more rights over these motor vehicles.

FOURTH: Complainant failed to substantiate her claim that the motor

vehicles were acquired during her marriage to ROLANDO B. EDRALIN. In
fact, almost all motor vehicles were acquired during the first marriage of
our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] father and mother, MARWEN ANTONIO
EDRALIN.

FIFTH: The element of “intent to gain” or “animus lucrandi” is absent.

Complainant failed to allege material and ultimate facts showing animus
lucrandi.

ELEMENT THAT PROPERTY BELONGED TO ANOTHER

IS NOT APPLICABLE. WE OWN THE PROPERTIES.

7.Q: Can you explain why you claim that the element in carnapping/theft
that the property must belong to another is absent in this case, insofar as
you are concerned?.
A: Yes, sir.

During his lifetime, ROLANDO B. EDRALIN married twice.

The first marriage was with our [insofar as Kylie Mae and Kyle
John] mother, MARWEN V. ANTONIO last January 8, 1989.3

Our [insofar as Kylie Mae and Kyle John] mother, MARWEN V.

ANTONIO died last April 9, 2007, at Cebu City.4

7-A.Q: How many children did spouses ROLANDO B. EDRALIN

and MARWEN V. ANTONIO have?
A: They have two [2], herein-respondents KYLIE MAE EDRALIN-
SULASULA5 and KYLE JOHN A. EDRALIN.6

3
Annex “3” = Marriage Contract between Rolando B. Edralin and Marwen V. Antonio last January 8, 1989.
4
Annex “4” = Death Certificate of Marwen A. Edralin, died on April 9, 2007.
5
Annex “5” = Birth Certificate of Kylie Mae A. Edralin, born on July 27, 1991.
6
Annex “6” = Birth Certificate of Kyle John A. Edralin, born on October 6, 2000.

3
 Then last November 28, 2009, ROLANDO B. EDRALIN, who was then
43 years old married the complainant, LUCELINE MANGAPIS, who was then
24 years old.7

During their marriage, LUCELINE MANGAPIS begot two [2] children,

although we have entertained certain doubts on the paternity of one [1] of
the children because no resemblance of ROLANDO B. EDRALIN can ever be
attributed from the physical and facial features of the child:

1. Kris Danlord M. Edralin, born on July 15, 2011, Oroquieta

City.
2. Rolando M. Edralin, Jr., April 12, 2015, Oroquieta City. No
features resembling to Rolando B. Edralin.

8.Q: During the first marriage of your father, ROLANDO B. EDRALIN and
MARWEN A. EDRALIN, what was their means of occupation?
A: They were both engaged in business endeavors, as follows:

A. RMK General Merchandise [main], located at Dban,

Calamba, Misamis Occidental. Groceries.

B. RMK General Merchandise [branch], located previously at

Pascua Street, now P. Bergado St., Dban, Calamba, Misamis
Occidental.

C. JULIE’s BAKESHOP, located at Pascua Street, Dban, Calamba,

Misamis Occidental. Groceries.

9.Q: During the first marriage of your father, ROLANDO B. EDRALIN and
MARWEN A. EDRALIN, were they able to acquire properties?
A: Yes, sir. They were able to acquire real and personal properties, like
motor vehicles and jewelries.

10.Q: What can you say to the claim of the complainant LUCELINE
MANGAPIS that the properties she accused you of carnapping were
acquired during her marriage to ROLANDO B. EDRALIN?.
A: That is a lie. She never presented any document, especially a certificate
of registration and document of sale, to substantiate her claim. In fact, we
strongly dispute the identification of one [1] or two [2] mentioned motor

7
Annex “7” = Marriage Contract of Rolando B. Edralin and Luceline Sardual Mangapis last November 28,
2009 at Calamba, Misamis Occidental.

4
vehicles as in-existent. Moreover, the identifiable and existing motor
vehicles that she mentioned were all acquired during the first marriage of
ROLANDO B. EDRALIN to MARWEN A. EDRALIN, not in the second marriage.

10-A.Q: When MARWEN A. EDRALIN died last April 9, 2007,

was there a liquidation or settlement/partition of her
properties/estate?
A: There was none, sir.

10-B.Q: So who owned the properties left by MARWEN A.

EDRALIN?.
A: Under the law of intestate succession, the estate of our
mother, where she co-owned all the properties, should be
divided in equal shares by us [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] and
our father, ROLANDO B. EDRALIN.8 Thus, we [Kylie Mae and
Kyle John] co-owned with our father, the entire estate of our
mother, which included her share on all the businesses, all the
real and personal properties, inclusive of all the motor
vehicles, all acquired during the marriage. This right of
ownership cannot be taken away from us. This is by operation
of law.

10-C. Why do you say that your mother, MARWEN A. EDRALIN

co-owned all the properties acquired during the marriage with
your father?
A: Because the property regime that governed their
relationship was absolute community of property, not conjugal
partnership of gains, having been married last January 8, 1989,
after the effectivity of the Family Code.9 So, she is the co-
owner of all the properties acquired during the marriage thru
their efforts and endeavor.

Articles 75, 88, 90, and, 91 of the Family Code of the

Philippines, provide:

Article 75. ‘The future spouses may, in the marriage

settlements, agree upon the regime of absolute
community of property, conjugal partnership of gains,
complete separation of property, or any other regime.
In the absence of a marriage settlement, or when the

8
Article 996, Civil Code of the Philippines: “If a widow or widower and legitimate children or descendants
are left, the surviving spouse has in the succession the same share as that of each of the children”.
9
The Family Code of the Philippines took effect on August 3, 1988.

5
 regime agreed upon is void, the system of absolute
community of property as established in this Code
shall govern.”

“Article 88. The absolute community of property

between spouses shall commence at the precise
moment that the marriage is celebrated. Any
stipulation, express or implied, for the commencement
of the community regime at any other time shall be
void.”

“Article 90. The provisions on co-ownership shall apply

to the absolute community of property between the
spouses in all matters not provided for in this Chapter.”

“Article 91. Unless otherwise provided in this Chapter

or in the marriage settlements, the community
property shall consist of all the property owned by the
spouses at the time of the celebration of the marriage
or acquired thereafter.”

Our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] mother, MARWEN A. EDRALIN

was, therefore, the co-owner of all the properties acquired
during her marriage with our father, thru their joint efforts and
endeavour.

When our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] mother, MARWEN A.

EDRALIN died, her rights to all the properties, formed part of
her intestate estate, which should now be owned equally
among us10 [Kylie Mae, Kyle John and our father, Rolando B.
Edralin].

11.Q: You said that when your [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] mother,
MARWEN A. EDRALIN died last April 9, 2007, there was no liquidation or
settlement/partition of her estate?
A: There was none, sir.

11-A.Q: So, what regime of property relationship governed

between ROLANDO B. EDRALIN and his second wife, the
herein-complainant, LUCELINE MANGAPIS?.
A: To what we were informed, it is the regime of complete
separation of property, sir.

Article 103 of the Family Code provides:

10
Ibid at 8.

6
 “Upon the termination of the marriage by death, the
community property shall be liquidated in the same
proceeding for the settlement of the estate of the
deceased.

If no judicial settlement proceeding is instituted, the

surviving spouses shall liquidate the community
property either judicially or extra-judicially within six
months from the death of the deceased spouse. If
upon the lapse of the six months period, no liquidation
is made, any disposition or encumbrance involving
the community property of the terminated marriage
shall be void.

Should the surviving spouse contract a second

marriage without compliance with the foregoing
requirements, a mandatory regime of complete
separation of property shall govern the property
relations of the subsequent marriage.”

12.Q: Since the property relationship that governed the marriage between
your [Kylie Mae ane Kyle John] father, ROLANDO B. EDRALIN and the
herein-complainant, LUCELINE MANGAPIS was a complete separation of
property, what is its implication?
A: LUCELINE MANGAPIS had no known income, property, or occupation, at
the time she married our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] father.

Thus, from what we were informed under the Family Code, all the
shares that our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] father acquired after the death
of our mother, and was brought to his second marriage with the herein-
complainant, still belonged separately to him. And, whatever fruits or
income obtained from that business, also belonged separately to him.11

These included all properties acquired during the second marriage

using money from the fruits or income from his separate properties.

The complainant, LUCELINE MANGAPIS cannot claim ownership to

one –half of whatever properties brought to the marriage by ROLANDO B.
EDRALIN or acquired during the marriage using money from the fruits or
income from our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] father’s separate properties.

11
Article 145 of the Family Code of the Philippines, “Each spouse shall own, dispose of, possess,
administer and enjoy his own separate estate, without need of the consent of the other. To each spouse
shall belong all earnings from his or her profession, business or industry and all fruits, natural, industrial or
civil, due or received during the marriage from his or her separate property.”

7
13.Q: Since your father already died, having been murdered last March 22,
2018, who owns now the properties that he left?
A: All properties [business, real and personal properties, jewelries,
bank deposits] brought by our father to his marriage should be limited to
what was his share after our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] mother’s death,
because we maintain that we already co-owned all these properties.

It is only these properties limited to the share of our [Kylie Mae and
Kyle Ann] father, that should be presumably divided equally between the
children of the first, second marriages and the surviving spouse, excluding
the child born out of wedlock by the surviving spouse.

In other words, as children of the first marriage, our [Kylie Mae and
Kyle John] share to the properties is bigger. While, I, respondent ALFREDO
B. EDRALIN, being the uncle of minor, KYLE JOHN A. EDRALIN am standing
as his guardian to protect his rights and interests, and also acting pursuant
to the request of KYLIE MAE A. EDRALIN to help and assist her and her
minor brother in the preservation of their rights, shares and interests over
their properties.

14.Q: Why do you say that the estate of ROLANDO B. EDRALIN should be
presumably divided – why presumably?
A: Because as we have earlier said, we are entertaining doubts as to the
paternity of one of the children. Besides, if an attempt to the life of a
spouse is a ground for disinheritance, then how much more if it resulted to
the murder and death of the spouse?.

15.Q: Going back to the complaint for carnapping, is this the reason why
you are claiming that the element that the property should belong to
another does not apply to you?
A: Yes, sir. We [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] own a greater part of the
properties of our father, inclusive of motor vehicles.

The complainant, LUCELINE MANGAPIS had no known income,

property, or occupation, at the time she married our [Kylie Mae and Kyle
John] father, nor did she have any sufficient money to purchase vehicles,
thus, it cannot be gainsaid that she owned separately these motor vehicles.
She has not also presented any proof that she acquired these motor
vehicles out of her own separate money.

Since the property relationship that governed her relationship with

our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] father, ROLANDO B. EDRALIN was a

8
complete separation of property, then it was incumbent upon her to prove
that she had known income, property, or occupation, at the time she
married our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] father.

Until now, no single proof was presented.

Moreover, as we have earlier said, we are entertaining doubts as to

the paternity of one of the children. Besides, it an attempt to the life of a
spouse is a ground for disinheritance, then how much more if it resulted to
the murder and death of the spouse?.

ELEMENT OF ANIMUS LUCRANDI ABSENT.

15.Q: Going back to the complaint for carnapping, why do you say that the
element of animus lucrandi does not exist?
A: From the foregoing narration of facts, it is clear that we [Kylie Mae and
Kyle John] are the legal or intestate heirs of the late ROLANDO B. EDRALIN,
and that our rights to the properties are greater because we are the
children of the first marriage.

Our rights of ownership to the properties immediately ripened upon

the death of our mother, MARWEN A. EDRALIN, because she did not leave
any last will and testament.

No operative act, like the execution of a document of partition, was

necessary to vest ownership to us because intestate succession occurs by
operation of law upon the death of the decedent. We became co-owners
automatically, by operation of law.

Being co-owners, we cannot be accused of having an “intent to

gain”, or animus lucrandi, or cause undue or unjust enrichment at the
expense of others.

The elements of the crime of carnapping/theft require that the

property taken must BELONG TO ANOTHER; and that the taking must be
done with animus lucrandi.

Both elements do not exist.

Intent to gain or animus lucrandi is a state of mind.

9
 Animus lucrandi or intent to gain is an internal act which can be
established through the overt acts of the offender. It may be presumed
from the furtive taking of useful property pertaining to another.

Intent to gain is a frame of mind.

Nobody can read the mind of a person.

So, intent to gain must be ascertained from the overt acts of the
perpetrator. These overt acts should be established and proven, separately.

It was incumbent, therefore, for the complainant to establish and

prove these overt acts, so that a reasonable mind can make a conclusion
that there was an intent to gain.

But in this case, the complainant, LUCELINE MANGAPIS did not

present any allegation in her affidavit, or from her witnesses showing that
our overt acts were furtive or suspicious, or surreptitious or that the taking
was attended by force, threat or intimidation.

In fact, the complainant did not ever describe how the theft was
committed, what we did, or how we did it.

15-A.Q: Where were these motor vehicles accordingly placed

or kept before these were taken?
A: In her complaint, LUCELINE MANGAPIS admitted that these
properties were kept at the compound owned by ROLANDO B.
EDRALIN,12 located at Purok 2, Brgy. Solinog, Calamba, Misamis
Occidental.

15-B.Q: What is the implication?

A: The implication is that she was not in actual possession, and
control of the motor vehicles.

Impliedly, she is not claiming these properties.

15-C.Q: Is it true then that the compound was owned by your

[Kylie Mae and Kyle John] father, ROLANDO B. EDRALIN?.
A: Yes, sir. This compound is within Lot No. 2763, with an area
12
See Q & A No. 4 of the J.A. of Luceline Mangapis dated April 26, 2018.

10
of 5,460 sq.m. It was acquired by our [Kylie Mae and Kyle
John] father thru donation during his first marriage to our
mother, MARWEN ANTONIO EDRALIN, and they have long
been in possession, control, occupation and enjoyment
thereof. The documentation and papers were processed later.
It is registered and declared in the name of our parents.

This land is adjacent to the land owned by herein-respondent

ALFREDO B. EDRALIN, just separated by a concrete fence.

15-D.Q: Who is in the actual possession, control, occupation,

and enjoyment of the said compound?
A: We [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] are in the actual possession,
control, occupation, and enjoyment of the said compound.

15-E.Q: Is the complainant, LUCELINE MANGAPIS in actual

possession, control, occupation, and enjoyment of the said
compound?
A: No, sir. She is residing at Unidos, Municipality of Plaridel,
Misamis Occidental.

15-F.Q: So, are you saying that the motor vehicles claimed to
be stolen, are found in a compound not in the actual
possession, control, occupation, and enjoyment of the
complainant. Instead, the motor vehicles are within your
control and possession?
A: That is correct, sir. This is one of the reasons why we are
stressing that the element of animus lucrandi is absent or has
never been established by the complainant, for how can our
alleged or purported actions be considered furtive and
surreptitious when these vehicles are within our actual
possession and control?. There cannot even be an act of force
in the taking of the motor vehicles.

15-G.Q: In whose names are the motor vehicles registered?

A: As far as we are concerned, these motor vehicles are
registered in the name of our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John]
father, ROLANDO B. EDRALIN. No money coming from the
complainant was used to acquire it.

If LUCELINE MANGAPIS owns the purported motor vehicles,

why can’t she produce the certificates of registration?. Why

11
 are the purported motor vehicles not within her control and
possession?. Why are the purported motor vehicles not within
her residence at Unidos, Plaridel, Misamis Occidental but
instead within the compound of our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John]
father?.

16.Q: What can you say to the list of motor vehicles that were
accordingly stolen?
A: Aside from an ISUZU truck Elf, color Black, bearing plate no.
KEU 922, there is no certainty in the description of the other
motorcycles. We are even confused of a Kawasaki motorcycle
and thence a big bike 1000cc motorcycle because we think
these are one and the same.

17.Q: According to the complainant that these motor vehicles which were
placed in the compound of ROLANDO B. EDRALIN were transferred to the
land of respondent ALFREDO B. EDRALIN. What can you say to this?.
A: As far as we [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] are concerned, after our [Kylie
Mae and Kyle John] father was murdered, there was a need for us to
preserve and protect our properties.

After our father was murdered, wherein the complainant, LUCELINE

MANGAPIS was suspected of being complicit to the crime together with her
paramour and hired gunman, she had began arrogating and dissipating the
properties [which incidentally, we already co-owned with our father].

We were informed that LUCELINE MANGAPIS had withdrawn substantial

money worth millions of pesos from the savings deposit of our [Kylie Mae
and Kyle John] and also appropriated around TEN MILLION
[P10,000,000.00] PESOS, more or less from the businesses of our father
without our knowledge, permission and consent. She had attempted to
withdrew some more had we not been able to warn the banks to desist
from allowing the further withdrawals.

LUCELINE MANGAPIS also began disposing and selling the stocks and
properties of our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] father without our knowledge,
permission and consent. This has caused so much trouble, conflict and
problem to us. We have tried to padlock the warehouses owned by our
father where several stocks and supplies were kept. But LUCELINE
MANGAPIS would forcefully break and destroy locks and even trespass our
properties. Thus, we are now even preparing the filing of criminal cases
against her and her cohorts.

12
There are several motor vehicles owned by us [Kylie Mae and Kyle John]
and father, in co-ownership. Some of these motor vehicles are under our
control, possession, and safekeeping. These included some of the motor
vehicles the complainant listed in this case. These are kept and placed in
the compound owned by our [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] father.

There are also motor vehicles that are in the possession of the complainant,
LUCELINE MANGAPIS.

LUCELINE MANGAPIS is trying to remove and sell some of the motor

vehicles which we [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] co-own with our father,
without our knowledge, permission and consent.

17-A.Q: What did you do to preserve and protect your rights

and interests?.
A: We [Kylie Mae and Kyle John] sought the help of our uncle,
respondent ALFREDO B. EDRALIN whose land is just adjacent
to the compound to transfer motor vehicles inside his land. We
pleaded to him to allow us to transfer motor vehicles inside his
land as we felt that LUCELINE MANGAPIS would not dare barge
into the titled private land of another person. We were
grateful that our uncle pitied and sympathized with us and
acceded to our request.

17-B.Q: So the purpose of transferring motor vehicles from

your father’s compound to the fenced adjacent titled land of
respondent ALFREDO B. EDRALIN was for safekeeping and
preservation/protection of your rights to the motor vehicles?
A: That is absolutely correct, sir.

17-C.Q: Was it your intention to use the motor vehicles or sell

it or encumber it?
A: No, sir. We do not have any such intention. We never
allowed it to be used or enjoyed by anybody. Until now, the
motor vehicles were never used. We just wanted it to be safe,
preserved and our rights protected from the greedy motivation
of our stepmother who was suspected of being complicit to
the murder of our father.

Unfortunately, she had the gall to even charge us criminally,

after the dishonest and disloyal acts she committed against
our father.

13
 Worst, she has caused so much mental stress, emotional and
psychological stress to a minor, KYLE JOHN A. EDRALIN.

17-D.Q: Did you entertain any illegal intent to gain from the
transfer of the motor vehicles?
A: No, sir.

17.E.Q: How about respondent ALFREDO B. EDRALIN?

A: Respondent ALFREDO B. EDRALIN never used, even a single
minute, the motor vehicles. He has his own motor vehicles
which are better. Besides, the help of respondent ALFREDO B.
EDRALIN was just asked to protect and preserve the motor
vehicles. It was really very embarrassing to us [Kylie Mae and
Kyle John] that he was impleaded for acceding to our [Kylie
Mae and Kyle John] plea and request for help.

17-F.Q: Did you not feel that these motor vehicles were safe
within the compound of your father?
A: We did not feel safe and secure because LUCELINE
MANGAPIS had constantly been barging and illegally
trespassing into the compound together with her cohorts,
even destroying the padlocks we placed in the warehouses,
and then removing stocks and supplies, without our
permission and consent. In fact, so much trouble, chaos and
problem has arisen every time she will do it.

We wanted to be decent and civil about it as our lawyer even

sent a letter to her for a conference, but she did not appear.

She ignored our plea.

She instead used brute force, threat, intimidation against us.

We felt helpless because she would bring several men, some

unknown and suspicious-looking, with sling bags, which we
suspect to contain guns, to force her way inside our
compound.

This just goes to show and prove that the acts charged against the
respondents cannot be described as furtive, secretive and surreptitious.

14
 There is a total absence of an allegation in complainant’s affidavit
and her witnesses whereupon the prosecutor could deduce from to make
a conclusion or determination of an illegal intent to gain.

Clearly then, the complainant failed to prove intent to gain.

Besides, to our [the respondents] mind really we are co-owners of

the motor vehicles and what we did was done in honest good faith, to
preserve and protect our rights to our properties.

18.Q: What did you feel from the complaint against you?.
A: It’s like rubbing salt to an injury from a person complicit to the crime.
Not just a simple injury, but death of our father/brother.

We are appalled and shocked by the gull of LUCELINE MANGAPIS, who not
only betrayed her husband, but is complicit to the crime. We feel so angry,
and sad. We cannot fathom the emotions in us. We suffered sleepless
nights, mental anxiety and loss of appetite.

Worst, we learned just recently that the gunman, Alejandro Iman, was also
shot and murdered a few days ago, perhaps in a bid to forever silence him.

At the appropriate case, we will file corresponding claim for damages.

19.Q: Do you have anything more to say?.

A: No more unless further asked. We only pray that the complaint be
immediately dismissed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto affixed our signatures this

th
9 day of May, 2018, at Dipolog City, Philippines.

KYLIE MAE A. EDRALIN KYLE JOHN A. EDRALIN

Affiant Affiant
PhilHealth ID No. 15-050329338-4 Univ. of Cebu ID No.17321458

ALFREDO B. EDRALIN
Affiant
SSS ID No. 08-0892028-5

15
 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO in my personal presence, this 9th day
of May, 2018, at Dipolog City, Philippines, affiants identified thru their
competent proofs of identity, which bear their respective photographs and
signatures, and who avowed under penalty of law to the whole truth of
the contents of the instrument or document, and that they executed the
same freely and voluntarily.

Doc. No. ______: PETER Y. CO

Page No. ______: Notary Public
Book No. _XCVIX: Cities of Dipolog, Dapitan & Province of Zamboanga del Norte
Series of 2018. Until December 31, 2018
PTR OR No. 6121116 1-05-2018 Zambo. Norte
IBP Lifetime No. 06834 07-18-2006
Roll No. 35379 05-20-1988
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0000522 08-16-2016

I, Atty. Peter Y. Co, hereby confirm that I prepared the

Judicial Joint Counter-Affidavit of KYLIE MAE A. EDRALIN, KYLE
JOHN A. EDRALIN and ALFREDO B. EDRALIN, or that it was
taken and prepared in my presence, and that the foregoing is a
complete and faithful record of the questions asked and the
corresponding answers that they gave.

All the answers in the affidavit were supplied by them who

were not coached nor influenced by anybody, as the same
were all voluntarily and spontaneously given and supplied by
them.

PETER Y. CO
PTR No. 6121156 01-05-2018 Zambo. Norte
IBP Lifetime No. 06894 07-18-2006
Roll No. 35379 May 30, 1988
MCLE VI-0000522 08-16-2016

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 9th day of May, 2018, at

Dipolog City, Philippines.

16
During the first marriage of ROLANDO B. EDRALIN with MARWEN
ANTONIO.

I = BUSINESSES:
1. RMK General Merchandise [main], located at Militante Street, Dban,
Calamba, Misamis Occidental. Groceries.

a. The land where the store is found is owned by Rolando

married to Marwen.

b. This is still existing. This is managed by Rolando and

supervised by JESSEL GULA-GULA. But temporarily closed by
Kylie since April 4, 2018. JESSEL GULA-GULA is now temporarily
working with Kylie to c
onduct inventory of stocks and sometimes at the Julie’s
Bakeshop.

2. RMK General Merchandise [branch], located at Pascua Street, Dban,

Calamba, Misamis Occidental. It is besides Julie’s Bakeshop

a. The land where the store is found was owned by the Baaclo
family. RMK was just renting.

b. This is still existing. This is managed by Rolando and

supervised by JESSEL GULA-GULA. But temporarily closed by
Kylie since April 4, 2018. JESSEL GULA-GULA is now temporarily
working with Kylie to conduct inventory of stocks and
sometimes at the Julie’s Bakeshop.

3. JULIE’s BAKESHOP, located at Pascua Street, Dban, Calamba, Misamis

Occidental. Groceries.

a. The land where the store is found is owned by Rolando

married to Marwen.

b. This is still existing.

II = REAL PROPERTIES:
1. Land located at Solinog, Calamba, Misamis Occidental.
Lot No. 2763, with an area of 5,460 sq.m. TD No. 04-0017-00382 for the
year 2016. Acquired thru Deed of Donation dated ____. TCT No. T-135-
2015000038, registered in the name of Rolando married to Marwen.

17
 1-A. Ancestral house of the previous owners, made of semi-
concrete. Nobody is residing.

1-B. Old Pastoral house. Nobody is occupying. Semi-concrete.

1-C. Unfinished concrete 2-storey house of Rolando and

Lucilyn. Constructed in 2011. Nobody residing. Not yet
finished.

1-D. House of Rolando and Marwen. One-storey concrete

house.
After Marwen’s death, Rolando, Lucilyn and Kylie lived. After
Rolando died, Luceline left and resided at Unidos, Plaridel,
Misamis Occidental. Kylie remained. Now no longer occupied
since April 1, 2018.

1-E. Two [2] Warehouses constructed during Maquiling’s time.

The grandfather used and operated it and filled with charcoal
and coprax. Thence, occupied by Rolando. Filled-up with
cement [RL Builders]. The second warehouse filled with
groceries [RMK].

After Marwen’s death, Rolando and Lucilen occupied and used

warehouse 1 for cement of RL Builders.

After Rolando’s death, stocks of RL Builder are inside

warehouse 1.

But now padlocked. BUT ALWAYS DESTROYED BY LUCELINE.

1-F.Warehouse 2 used for groceries of RMK.

1-G. Warehouse 3 constructed in 2007 by Rolando and

Marwen. Stocks are groceries of RMK.

1-H. Warehouse 4 constructed during the time of Rolando and

Marwen [oil]. RL Builders construction supplies. PADLOCKED
BUT DESTROYED

1-I. Warehouse 5 constructed during the time of Rolando and

Marwen [parkingan sa sakyanan]. RL Builders [in between
house and grocery warehouse] used for “kabilya” and
petronas.

2. Land located at DBan, Calamba, Misamis Occidental.

18
Lot No. 4099, with an area of 53 sq.m. TD No. 04-0006-00554 for the year
2009. TCT No. T-16081, registered in the name of Rolando married to
Marwen.

2-A. Julie’s Bakeshop building constructed during the time of

Rolando and Marwen. Always occupied by Kylie.

3. Land located at Solinog, Camba, Misamis Occidental.

Lot No. 2748, with an area of 608 sq.m. TD No. 04-0017-00050 for the year
2009. TCT No. T-15815, registered in the name of Rolando married to
Marwen.

3-A. Bunkhouse constructed during the time of Rolando and

Marwen. Occupied by trusted staff of Rolando and Marwen till
now.

4. Land located at Buena Voluntad, Plaridel, Misamis Occidental.

Lot No. 1316-Part, with an area of 1,758 sq.m. TD No. 10-0005-00131 for
the year 2009. OCT No. P-37505, registered in the name of Rolando married
to Marwen. Agricultural. No structure. Nobody acts as caretaker.

5. Land located at Buena Voluntad, Plaridel, Misamis Occidental.

Lot No. 1316-Part, with an area of 4,000 sq.m. TD No. 10-0005-00164 for
the year 2009. OCT No. P-37506, registered in the name of Rolando married
to Marwen. Agricultural. No structure. Nobody acts as caretaker.

6. Land located at Buena Voluntad, Plaridel, Misamis Occidental.

Lot No. 30, with an area of 19,363 sq.m. TD No. 10-0005-00253 for the year
2010. CLOA/TCT No. P-1922, registered in the name of Rolando married to
Marwen. Agricultural. No structure. Nobody acts as caretaker.

7. Land located at DBan, Calamba, Misamis Occidental.

Lot No. 4267-B, with an area of 54 sq.m. TD No. 04-0006-00356 for the year
2009. OCT No. P-35989, registered in the name of Rolando married to
Marwen.

1-E. No structure. This is located at the back of Julies

Bakeshop.

8. Land located at DBan, Calamba, Misamis Occidental.

19
Lot No. 2035-Part, with an area of 42 sq.m. TD No. 04-0006-00552 for the
year 2009. TCT No. T-16082, registered in the name of Rolando married to
Marwen.

8-A. Old wooden house existing upon purchase. RL Builders

paints.

III = MOTOR VEHICLES:

1. Toyota Hilux, plate number YKG903, colored black. LUC

2. Honda City, plate number DR7968, colored black. LUC
3. Mitsubishi Montero, without plate number, colored black. LUC
4. Isuzu NHR, plate number KGH250, colored white. ALFREDO COMPOUND
5. One Kawasaki Ninja big bike 250CC, colored black. LUC
6. One Multicab, colored black. LUC
7. Four [4] motorcabs, with sidecar. LUC

8. Isuzu truck Elf “ SOUTH TIGER”, colored black plate no. KEU 922.
ROLANDO’S COMPOUND-ALFREDO COMPOUND
9. Kawasaki colored black, plate no. 090809. QUESTIONABLE- WHERE IS
THIS/ IS THIS THE BIG BIKE?
10. Suzuki Raider 150 cc, plate no. JA78931. ROLANDO COMPOUND-
ALFREDO COMPOUND
11. Big Bike 1000cc, no plate no. ROLANDO COMPOUND-ALFREDO
COMPOUND.
12. “Isuzu Elf Cargo truck forward”. This does not exist. There is an Isuzu
Forward with plate no. PEG293 but this is owned by ANGELES
MAQUILING. This was purchased by Rolando earlier. But this has not been
fully paid yet. This was used by RL Builders. ROLANDO COMPOUND-
ALFREDO COMPOUND
13. There is an Mitsubishi Canter black colored with plate no. GGE 154. This
is owned by ANGELES MAQUILING. This was purchased by Rolando during
1st marriage. This was used by RMK. ALFREDO COMPOUND

14. Ford Fierra with plate no. KAH514. This is owned by ANGELES
MAQUILING, and just borrowed by Rolando. This was used by RMK.
ALFREDO COMPOUND
15. Mitsubishi Canter green. This is owned by ANGELES MAQUILING, and
just borrowed by Rolando. This was used by RMK. ALFREDO COMPOUND

16. Suzuki Multicab with plate no. JDA248, colored brown. This is owned by
Ozamis resident. This was purchased by Rolando during second marriage.
Used by RMK. ALFREDO COMPOUND

20
17. Isuzu Fuego pick-up colored white with plate no. GGV465. This was
purchased from Dante Aliman. Not yet transferred. Acquired during 2nd
marriage. Not used but inside compound of Alfredo. ALFREDO COMPOUND

18. XRM with sidecar black colored, plate no, temp. 9J5091. Acquired by
Rolando during second marriage. ALFREDO COMPOUND

19. Badja motorcycle colored blue, plate no. temp. 103210. Acquired by
Rolando during 2nd marriage. Used by Julies Bakeshop. ALFREDO COMPOUND

20. Two mountain bicycles. LUC.

IV = JEWELRIES:
1. Jewelries worth 5 MILLION. These were lost and stolen.

V = BANK ACCOUNTS:
1. P10M taken by LUC.

PROPERTIES DURING SECOND MARRIAGE

I = BUSINESSES:
1. RL BUILDER [main], located at P. Bergado Street, Dban, Calamba,
Misamis Occidental. Groceries.

a. The land where the building or store is found is owned by

Rolando in his 2nd marriage.

b. This is still existing. This is managed by Rolando and

supervised by Lucelin.
2. RL BUILDER [branch], located at provincial road, Dban, Calamba, Misamis
Occidental.

a. The land where the store is found is owned by Corpuz. RL

was just renting.

b. This is still existing.

3. LUCY’S CELLPHONE & ACESSORIES, located at P. Bergado, Dban,

Calamba, Misamis Occidental. Groceries.

a. The land where the store is found is owned by Lourdes

Chua. Just renting. This is besides the RL Builders main.
21
 b. This is still existing.

II = REAL PROPERTIES:
1. Land located at Unidos, Plaridel, Misamis Occidental.
Lot No. 1515-A, with an area of 13,926 sq.m. TD No. 10-0032-00552 for the
year 2007. TCT No. T-135-2017000013 Registered in the name of Rolando
2nd marriage. Agricultural.

2. Land located at Unidos, Plaridel, Misamis Occidental.

2-A. Residential house of Rolando and Luciline. Finished in

August, 2017. Previously, it was the parents of Luci who lived
there. After the death of Rolando, Luci transferred.

3. Land located at Solinog, Calamba, Misamis Occidental.

Lot No. 2764-C-3, with an area of 526 sq.m. TD No. 04-0017-00413 for the
year 2009. TCT No. T-135-2017000014, registered in the name of Rolando.
2nd marriage.

3-A. No structure. Dwarf coco trees.

III = MOTOR VEHICLES:

1. Toyota Hilux, plate number YKG903, colored black. LUC

2. Honda City, plate number DR7968, colored black. LUC
3. Mitsubishi Montero, without plate number, colored black. LUC
4. Isuzu NHR, plate number KGH250, colored white. ALFREDO COMPOUND
5. One Kawasaki Ninja big bike 250CC, colored black. LUC
6. One Multicab, colored black. LUC
7. Four [4] motorcabs, with sidecar. LUC

8. Isuzu truck Elf “ SOUTH TIGER”, colored black plate no. KEU 922.
ROLANDO’S COMPOUND-ALFREDO COMPOUND
9. Kawasaki colored black, plate no. 090809. QUESTIONABLE- WHERE IS
THIS/ IS THIS THE BIG BIKE?
10. Suzuki Raider 150 cc, plate no. JA78931. ROLANDO COMPOUND-
ALFREDO COMPOUND
11. Big Bike 1000cc, no plate no. ROLANDO COMPOUND-ALFREDO
COMPOUND.
12. “Isuzu Elf Cargo truck forward”. This does not exist. There is an Isuzu
Forward with plate no. PEG293 but this is owned by ANGELES
MAQUILING. This was purchased by Rolando earlier. But this has not been

22
fully paid yet. This was used by RL Builders. ROLANDO COMPOUND-
ALFREDO COMPOUND

13. There is an Mitsubishi Canter black colored with plate no. GGE 154. This
is owned by ANGELES MAQUILING. This was purchased by Rolando during
1st marriage. This was used by RMK. ALFREDO COMPOUND

14. Ford Fierra with plate no. KAH514. This is owned by ANGELES
MAQUILING, and just borrowed by Rolando. This was used by RMK.
ALFREDO COMPOUND
15. Mitsubishi Canter green. This is owned by ANGELES MAQUILING, and
just borrowed by Rolando. This was used by RMK. ALFREDO COMPOUND

16. Suzuki Multicab with plate no. JDA248, colored brown. This is owned by
Ozamis resident. This was purchased by Rolando during second marriage.
Used by RMK. ALFREDO COMPOUND
17. Isuzu Fuego pick-up colored white with plate no. GGV465. This was
purchased from Dante Aliman. Not yet transferred. Acquired during 2nd
marriage. Not used but inside compound of Alfredo. ALFREDO COMPOUND

18. XRM with sidecar black colored, plate no, temp. 9J5091. Acquired by
Rolando during second marriage. ALFREDO COMPOUND

19. Badja motorcycle colored blue, plate no. temp. 103210. Acquired by
Rolando during 2nd marriage. Used by Julies Bakeshop. ALFREDO COMPOUND

20. Two mountain bicycles. LUC.

IV = JEWELRIES:
1. Jewelries worth 5 MILLION. These were lost and stolen.

V = BANK ACCOUNTS:
1. P10M taken by LUC.

CRIMINAL CARNAPPING.

The vehicles were not placed inside any building. These were placed
outside, at the dryer, but within the compound in the Rolando.

ALFREDO owns the adjacent land. A concrete wall just separates the
compound of Rolando.

23
APRIL 8, 2018 SUNDAY.

IT WAS NOT ALFREDO WHO TOOK IT. I DID NOT GO TO THE COMPOUND. I
WAS JUST INSIDE MY LAND. KYLIE AND KYLE AND BOBONG LOREJO WERE
NOT THERE.

KYLIE WAS AT ALFREDO’S COMPOUND. KYLE WAS IN ALFREDO’S

COMPOUND. BOBONG LOREJO WAS IN THE D’DELES SHOPPING CENTER
OWNER BY ALFREDO AT P. BERGADO, DBAN [SAME ROAD OF RL BUILDERS].
HE WAS A MONITORING SUPERVISOR OF EMPLOYEES.

THE PERSONS WHO TOOK IT WERE: DENNIS “BOBONG” BALIAO. BONIFACIO

CABALLERO. FREDDIE BUSLON.

CHILREN DURING 2ND MARRIAGE

1. Kris Danlord M. Edralin, July 15, 2011, Oroquieta City.

2. Rolando M. Edralin, Jr., April 12, 2015, Oroquieta City. No features
resembling to Rolando.

Before Kris, Rolando and Luceline quarreled because of the latter’s extra-
marital affair.

24