Q: Now, you said you were met by Lourdes Gamboa at the office, what did she tell you, if any? A: She told me if Im applying in that agency, the vacancy is as chambermaid in Brunei, madam. Q: What else did she tell you? A: So, she [asked] me if Im interested and I said yes, madam x x x x Q: What else did she tell you? A: She told me to fill up the bio-data form and visa application, madam x x x x Q: Apart from these documents, these visa application form and bio-data, were you asked to fill up any document? A: Upon payment, madam. Q: Which payment? A: The P 1,500.00 marked money, madam. Q: Who told you to pay? A: Lourdes Gamboa, madam x x x x Q: Now, did you actually pay the P1,500? A: Yes, madam. Q: To whom did you pay? A: I paid to Ms. Lourdes Gamboa, madam. Q: Who received the amount? A: It was Teresita Reyoberos, madam. Q: Upon whose instruction? A: Lourdes Gamboa, madam.[17] The precise degree of participation of accused-appellant Lourdes Gamboa in the illegal recruitment scheme is very clear from the foregoing testimonies. She was present when the complainants were being recruited and in fact personally recruited some of them, providing and assisting them in filling up the application forms, answering their queries, receiving documents and payments, and repeatedly assuring them that they would be able to leave for their respective jobs abroad. These acts demonstrated beyond any cavil of doubt that she was a knowing and willingparticipant in the recruitment activities of Melba Mioza and her group. Moreover, accused-appellants bare denials and self-serving assertion that she was a mere job applicant herself certainly cannot prevail over the positive assertions of Officer Cabal and the complainants who had no ill motive to testify falsely against her. At any rate, the lack of criminal intent on the part of an accused - assuming exgratia argumenti that accused-appellant was indeed unaware of the illegal nature of the recruitment business of her co-accused - is hardly a defense in the prosecution for