Actress Claudine Barretto has one less problem to worry about as the Marikina Prosecutors Office dismissed the criminal cases filed against her by two of her former household helpers.
According to a press release, the two resolutions which were dated July 1, but were only released last August 29, the Marikina prosecutors found a “lack of sufficient probable cause” on the robbery and grave coercion charges filed by Maria Luisa Becher and on the perjury case filed by Dessa Patilan.
The eight-page resolution, as mentioned in the release, further noted that Becher’s case failed to prove the “element of force or intimidation” which was supposedly used against her by Barretto. The robbery and grave coercion case was dismissed by assistant city prosecutor Ernesto Ablay Jr. while the perjury case was junked by assistant city prosecutor Ricardo Paet, Jr.
While the cases against her have already been dropped, her helpers on the other hand are still facing qualified theft charges filed by Barretto at the Marikina Regional Trial Court.
The actress filed the case in July of last year when she accused them of attempting to steal pieces of her jewelry from her home in Loyola Grand Villas. Becher and Patilan had countered by lodging their own complaint against the actress claiming that Barretto took their personal belongings including their cellphones and a tablet.
Phillip Salvador can also now breathe easy as well after the Supreme Court (SC) upheld the Court of Appeals (CA) decision to acquit him of the estafa case filed against him by his former girlfriend Cristina Castillo a.k.a. Cristina Decena.
The high court, in a report by ABS-CBN News, has denied the petition for review lodged by Castillo’s camp and upheld the appellate court's Feb. 11, 2010 decision in favor of Salvador.
The former lovers’ legal battle started after Castillo claimed that Salvador supposedly used the US$100,000 she gave him as payment for a pair of earrings to a certain Charlie Chau for something else.
The Supreme Court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove that all elements of estafa are present in Salvador's case.
"For in fact, the prosecution's primary witness herself could not even establish clearly and precisely how appellant committed the alleged fraud. She failed to convince us that she was deceived through misrepresentations and/or insidious actions," the higher court said.