Facts:
Before the
Court is a letter-complaint dated June 13, 2007 filed by Eva Lucia Z. Geroy (complainant)
charging Judge Dan R. Calderon (respondent) of the Regional Trial Court (RTC),
Branch 26, Medina, Misamis Oriental, with gross immorality for
having an extra-marital affair with her.
The complainant
alleges the following:
1. She was introduced by her cousin
Cesar Badilas (Badilas) to respondent in a Rotary Club dinner
on November 30, 2002.
2. Thereafter, respondent always communicated with her,
visited her at her house and showered her with food and gifts, making her
believe that he was single or separated as he acted like a bachelor towards
her.
3. They spent most of their time in his house in Upper Balulang, Cagayan de Oro City
where complainant would sleep over during weekdays and spend entire weekends
with respondent. They would dine in public places, watch movies, go
to malls, groceries and hear mass together.
4. Respondent lent her money and she ran errands for him
such as making reservations for his trips and purchasing items for his house,
encode decisions, pay bills and encash checks for
him. Respondent paid her tuition in a caregiver course and gave her
a cell phone for an e-load business.
There were
times, however, when complainant felt she was being abused by respondent, such
as when he wanted to take a picture of them naked after they had sexual
contact, when he asked her to buy abortive pills because his son impregnated
his girlfriend, and when he (respondent) forced her to utter vulgar words
during their intercourse. In August 2005, complainant went to Xavier University where
respondent was a professor, and respondent uttered hurtful words towards
her.
On December 24,
2005, complainant received a call from respondent and his wife degrading and
threatening her. She also received a text message from respondent on
December 29, 2005 saying that she had made herself a “despicable
disease.” Respondent's wife and daughter also called complainant,
confronting and threatening her. On March 21, 2007, complainant saw
respondent in a restaurant with a woman and when she approached respondent, he
cursed and looked angrily at her and asked the guard to drive her out. Respondent
then went to his car and locked the doors. Complainant knocked at
the window near the driver's seat but respondent arrogantly looked at her and
maneuvered his car, nearly hitting her, as he sped past her.
Complainant
avers that she was expecting that if her relationship with respondent would
end, there should be a friendly talk and a peaceful closure between them, but
none took place. She further claims that respondent is in another
relationship and she is filing the present case, not just to put an end to the
immoral conduct of respondent, but to prevent other women from being victimized
by him.
Attached to the
complaint are transcripts of respondent's text messages to her from December
2002 to 2005, pictures of her taken inside respondent's house, pictures of
complainant's diary, cellphones, gifts allegedly given to her by
respondent, receipts showing the name of respondent, and a photocopy of a check
showing that respondent lent her money.
In the
Resolution dated November 26, 2007, the Court, upon recommendation of the OCA, re-docketed the
complaint as a regular administrative matter and referred the same to the
Executive Justice of the Court of Appeals (CA), Cagayan de Oro Station,
for investigation, report and recommendation after a raffle of the case among
the Justices.
In the Report
which the Court received on July 31, 2008, Investigating Justice Rodrigo
F. Lim found respondent guilty of immorality and recommended his suspension for
six months without salary and other benefits.
Issue:
Whether
respondent is guilt of immorality based on the evidence presented including the
text messages made between the complainant and the respondent.
Held:
The Court finds
the report and recommendation of the Investigating Justice to be well-taken.
The Court has
not been sparing in its exhortation of judges that they should avoid
impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities. No position is
more demanding as regards the moral righteousness and uprightness of any
individual than a seat on the Bench; thus, their personal behavior, not only
while in the performance of official duties but also outside the court, must be
beyond reproach, for they are, as they so aptly are perceived to be, the
visible representation of law and of justice. A
judge traces a line around his official as well as personal conduct, a price he
has to pay for occupying an exalted position in the judiciary, beyond which he
may not freely venture.
As correctly
found by the Investigating Justice, the complainant was able to support her
charge of immorality against respondent and has shown that the latter had not
exhibited the ideals and principles expected of a magistrate. The
disclosure by complainant of very intimate facts about respondent and
respondent's own seemingly innocuous admissions clearly reveal the existence of
an illicit affair. Complainant would not have known personal information about
respondent, such as the skin tags in between his thighs, if they really did not
have an intimate physical relationship.
While respondent
insists that his relationship with complainant is purely professional, the text
messages which admittedly came from him are not of the kind an employer would
ordinarily send an employee. Try as he might, respondent's own
admissions betray his claim of innocence.
Complainant
related in detail her relationship with respondent and respondent could only
offer general denials. Even then, he could not completely deny some
communications which transpired between him and complainant which betrayed his
claim of a purely platonic relationship. As the Court has held, mere denial
does not overturn the relative weight and probative value of an affirmative
assertion. Denial is an inherently weak defense. To be
believed, it must be buttressed by strong evidence of non-culpability;
otherwise, such denial is purely self-serving and has no evidentiary
value.
The Court found the respondent guilty of
immorality.
____________________
Full text of the case available at: http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/decisions.php?doctype=Decisions%20/%20Signed%20Resolutions&docid=12295004701445203555
No comments:
Post a Comment