Republic of the Philippines )

Quezon City )S.S.

COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT
(OF RACHELLE MILDRED M. BAUTISTA)

I, Rachelle Mildred M. Bautista, of legal age, married, Filipino Citizen and with
residence and postal address at Unit 15P Excelsior Condominium, Eastwood, Libis,
Quezon City, after having been duly sworn to in accordance with law , do hereby
depose and state, that:

1. I am one of the respondents in the criminal charge hurled against me by Marina

Demition for alleged Estafa and violation of B.P. 22.

2. I vehemently and categorically deny all the allegations being charged by the said
complainant and humbly prays that this instant criminal complaint be dismissed for lack
of factual basis and legal standing.

3. Paragraphs 1 to 3 of the complaint-affidavit is partially admitted to the effect that I

obtained some cash loans from the complainant. There is also truth that in exchange of
the said cash loans, I and the other respondent, Jose Gerardo C. Bautista issued checks
but the said checks were issued incompletely and with specific instruction that the date
thereof, which remains to be blank at the time of the issuance, will be supplied only after
being duly informed by the herein respondent.

4. It must also be stressed that the herein complainant and respondent had several
business dealings before with the same arrangement and conditions involving different
cash loans and all of which went smooth without any obstacle because the respondent
did not encounter any problem in the collections that she had with private and public
entities of whom she had business transactions.

5. Paragraphs 4 to 7 are hereby denied for lack of factual basis and for being a
fabricated statement. It was the complainant who insisted for me to accept the cash
loans and enter into new transactions with her lending business considering that all other
transactions that I had with her did not encounter any problem and went well. I did not
claim that I have collectibles in the tune on tens of million before the City of Manila.

6. Again, it was the complainant who initially offered the cash loans when she
gained knowledge that I had several accounts/collectibles in the City of Manila
through public contracts. I did not entice nor misrepresent anything when I
entered the various cash loans with the complainant. In fact, in order to avoid any
problem with respect to re-payment, it was agreed that the dates as contained in
the checks will remain in blank and will only be supplied upon clearing of the
payments from the public entities in the bank account. It is only after said
clearance will the checks be ready for deposit and encashment.

7. Paragraphs 8 and 9 are hereby categorically denied for being a product of

manufactured statement. There is absolutely no truth to the allegation that I had no
intention of paying the cash loans. There is also no truth that I already collected
millions from the City of Manila. The truth of the matter is that the collectibles from the
City of Manila remains to be collectible up to this moment and the complainant and I did
not agree yet as to the date to be supplied in the blank check.

8. Surprisingly, after a careful review of the allegations in the complaint-affidavit of

the complainant and its annexes, it can easily be detected that it was the complainant
who solely provided for the date AUG 08 2016 in all the checks. Thereafter, the herein
complainant deposited ALL the checks in a single instance which is not in accordance
with our agreement and undertaking when we entered the cash loans.
9. Paragraphs 10 and 11 are hereby denied for lack of factual basis. It must be
stressed that I have not been notified of the maneuverings orchestrated by the herein
complainant when she supplied that dates in the checks contrary to our agreement. I
do not have also any notice of the fact that the complainant deposited the said checks.
I also do not have received any notice or demand from the complainant relative to the
checks. I did not receive any demand either in person, or by registered mail from the
complainant or any of her representatives.

10. Paragraphs 12 to 14 are hereby denied for being a product of illusion by the
herein complainant. There is not strand of truth to the allegation that I refuse to pick up
calls coming from the complainant and that I have absconded from liability and moves
from one address to another. It must be noted that the complainant is fully aware that I
no longer live together with the other respondent, Jose Gerardo C. Bautista, and does
not anymore live in No. 4 Philam Road, Captiloyo, Pasig City. The complainant is also
fully informed and aware that I presently live in my given address at Unit 15P Excelsior
Condominium, Eastwood, Libis, Quezon City.

11. To set the record straight, I did not in anyway walk-away nor abscond with my
obligation to the complainant which are purely cash loans. I also did not employ any
kind of deceit nor any fraudulent act in relation to our agreement.

12. Thus, from the foregoing premises, it is clear as water that no crime of Estafa
exists nor any violation of B.P. 22 is present which warrants the dismissal of this instant
criminal charge.

13. It is most respectfully prayed of this Honorable Office that the complaint
filed against me be DISMISSED for lack of merit in fact and in law and also for
lack of probable cause.

RACHELLE MILDRED BAUTISTA

Affiant/Respondent
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ____ day of
November 2016 at Quezon City.

ASSISTANT CITY PROSECUTOR

QUEZON CITY

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have personally examined the affiant and that she
voluntarily executed and understood his affidavit.

ASSISTANT CITY PROSECUTOR

QUEZON CITY