People vs Reyes : 104739-44 : November 18, 1997 : J. Panganiban : Th... 6 of 11 http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1997/nov1997/104739_44.htm Cristo the whole day. Earlier, on July 26, 1989, the Accused was given a t-shirt by the Iglesia ni Cristo as a memento of the 75th anniversary of the Iglesia ni Cristo (Exhibit 2). The Accused does not know whether the signature, on the Receipt, Exhibit A-1 is that of his sisters, the Accused Rose Reyes. On September 15, 1989, the Accused Rodolfo Caures followed up his application for employment abroad with the Accused Rose Reyes, Teresita Carillo and Ana Apilado. On September 18, 1989, the Accused Rodolfo Caures went to the house of his sister, the Accused Rose Reyes, and the latter informed the Accused Rodolfo Caures that she was going to Taipei and will be back by August, 1990 and the Accused will be able to leave for his employment in Taiwan after her arrival from Taipei and asked the Accused Rodolfo Caures to stay in her house as a caretaker during her stay in Taipei and that Ana Apilado will take care of the processing of his papers. The Accused agreed. The Accused Zenaida Caures, the wife of the Accused, remained in their house at No. 1114 Sampaguita Street, Pasay City. However, the Accused Rose Reyes never wrote the Accused Rodolfo Caures a letter nor remit to him any money for the rentals and his subsistence. The Accused did not know the address of the Accused Rose Reyes in Taipei. The Accused was forced to vacate the house of the Accused Rose Reyes and returned to his house in Sampaguita Street, Pasay City on September 30, 1989. The Accused was later arrested by the police authorities on August 19, 1990. At the police station, the Accused saw Teresita Carillo and Lily Monzon were present. Teresita Carillo demanded that the Accused divulged where the Accused Rose Reyes was and to return the money paid by the Private Complainants to the Accused. However, the Accused told Teresita Carillo that he did not know where the Accused Rose Reyes was and that they were even companions. Teresita Carillo then said: Bahala ka diyan. Mabulok ka diyan. The Accused never filed any complaint against Teresita Carillo and Ana Apilado. The Accused Rodolfo Caures does not know where his wife, the Accused Zenaida Caures, is now. The latter has not visited him at the City Jail. The Prosecution presented Teresita Carillo as its rebuttal witness. Teresita Carillo averred, when she testified before the Court, that sometime during the middle part of July, 1989, she, Amalia Salinas, Alvaro Monzon, Pedro Regalado and Gloria Salvador applied for employment with the Accused Rose Reyes who, at the time, was known to the Private Complainants as Rose Caures and the Accused Rodolfo Caures and Zenaida Caures. According to the said Accused Rose Reyes, her husbands family name was Reyes. The three (3) Accused promised and assured the Private Complainants and Teresita Carillo that the Accused will be able to facilitate their departure for Taiwan. The Private Complainants and Teresita Carillo paid on July 31, 1989, the total amount of P64,000.00 to the Accused Rodolfo Caures who counted the money who, in turn, handed over the money to the Accused Rose Reyes for the placement fee and visas. The latter, in turn, prepared in her own handwriting a Receipt for the said amount (Exhibits A and A-1). Although the Private Complainants and Teresita Carillo were supposed to pay to the Accused the total amount of P65,000.00 as placement fee and for the issuance of their visa, the Accused gave them a discount of P1,000.00 because they applied with the three (3) Accused at the same time. Teresita Carillo knew Ana Apilado because she was one of the applicants with the Accused but who also failed to leave for her promised employment abroad. It was Ana Apilado, after July 31, 1989, who told the Private Complainants and Teresita Carillo that the real name of the Accused Rose Reyes whom they knew as Rose Caures, was Rose Reyes. Teresita Carillo vehemently denied having been associated with the Accused Rose Reyes in any recruitment agency nor did she ever recruit the Accused Rodolfo Caures for employment abroad. The Issue In his brief, appellant raises a single issue:[13] 1/25/2016 12:35 AM