Kidnapping case vs Aussie, nanny dismissed

By Glazyl Y. Masculino

BACOLOD City – The City Prosecutor Office (CPO) in Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental has dismissed the alleged kidnapping case filed against an Australian national and a babysitter last month.

Based on a resolution dated July 30, 2021 and signed by City Prosecutor Joseph Arnel Zerna and deputy city prosecutor Alvin Aseniero, the CPO found lack of probable cause in the case and ordered the release from detention of the two respondents, whose names were withheld upon their request.

The foreigner and the babysitter were previously arrested by police here after they were accused by the foreigner’s former lover of allegedly kidnapping her two children from a hotel in Dumaguete City on July 18.

In the joint resolution, both respondents claimed that the complainant together with her two children and the babysitter left the family’s house here for Dumaguete City in the afternoon of July 16, without the knowledge of the foreigner.

On the other hand, the complainant claimed that in 2018, she and the foreigner separated because of alleged physical abuses which were recorded at the Bacolod City police station.

Despite having parted ways, the foreigner used to follow her and there were times that he took the children to force her to come back to him.

The complainant also claimed that she met another man and became her lover and when the foreigner found out, he continued to allegedly harass, her forcing her to move to another place, along with her two children and the babysitter.

In the evening of July 16, the complainant, along with her new lover, children, and babysitter arrived in a hotel in Dumaguete City, and checked in two rooms.

In the early morning of July 18, when the complainant went to the room of her children to check on them, she was surprised that her children and the babysitter were no longer there, including their belongings.

Upon checking the closed-circuit television (CCTV) camera footage of the hotel, which the complainant provided as evidence, she saw the foreigner, along with her brother, enter the hotel.

In less than five minutes, she saw her daughter go down the stairs from the second floor, followed by the babysitter, and the complainant’s brother who were carrying their belongings, and the foreigner, who was carrying the baby boy.

When they arrived here, the babysitter informed the complainant that they were at the residence of the foreigner, who also texted the complainant.

The complainant reported the incident to Dumaguete City Police Station, which conducted a pursuit operation, along with the Bacolod police, that led to the arrest of the two respondents here, for the alleged kidnapping.

The criminal complaint for kidnapping in alleged conspiracy with each other was filed against the foreigner and the nanny on July 21.

But the CPO said the evidence presented by the parties did not provide probable cause to indict the two respondents for the charges.

“While it is true that illegitimate children such as daughter, especially, the son, who is still three years of age, are under the parental authority of their mother under Article 176 of the Family Code of the Philippines, it must be considered also that unmarried live-in couples, such as the complainant and the foreigner, are recognized as a family unit. They are a family sans only the benefit of marriage. Thus, the foreigner has certain rights, responsibilities and obligations also to his son since he is the father. In fact, he was doing his part as a father by providing support and care, food, and shelter for his family to include the daughter and the latter’s studies,” the CPO resolution stated.

In her affidavit, the complainant admitted that when she and the foreigner lived together as husband and wife, the foreigner becoming the father of her two children.

In the CCTV footage at the hotel, it was the daughter who led or was ahead in walking out of the hotel that early morning of July 18.

“Thus, in resolving this case, this Office takes into consideration not just the above-mentioned facts, but also the fact that complainant and the foreigner were both living together here, and it was the complainant, who left the common abode taking the children with her without the knowledge of the foreigner, ‘a fact that appeared not to have been revealed to the Dumaguete City Police Station authorities since this fact was not stated in the complainant’s affidavit,’ and the fact that the foreigner is the father of the baby boy,” the resolution stated.

Also, there was no custody agreement by either parents or coming from the court regarding the exclusive custody of the children to the complainant. The babysitter was employed by the complainant, but whose salary is paid for by the foreigner.

Moreover, the text communication between the complainant and the foreigner as well as those between the two respondents show the concern and worry of the foreigner for the safety and well-being of the two children especially when they are in the company of the complainant’s new lover, who is not familiar and unknown to them.

In addition, when they arrived here and were already in the common residence, both respondents informed the complainant of such fact, All these facts negate the existence of malice, the intent to kidnap the two children and to deprive them of their liberty on the part of both respondents.

Lastly, the Office agrees with the arguments of the babysitter that she was only following the orders and instructions of both her employers, in accompanying the complainant to Dumaguete City, and going back to Bacolod City. Accordingly, she should not be held liable for the crime as charge in conspiracy with the foreigner.

Further, it was also discussed in the resolution that the complainant got pregnant and gave birth to a baby boy in Australia in 2018, as evidenced by the child’s birth certificate, with the complainant and the foreigner as the mother and father.

However, the complainant later claimed in her affidavit against the respondents that the father of her son is her former live-in partner, who is also the father of her daughter.

“Whether this statement is true or not for whatever reason this was claimed by the complainant in her present complaint against the foreigner, the fact is the foreigner is the father as shown in the child’s birth certificate, with both parties as parents and informants,” the resolution said. It is also noted that it was the complainant who attached the birth certificate in her complaint against the foreigner.

The two respondents were already released from police custody, following the dismissal of the case.