The Supreme Court has found a former executive assistant of retired Associate Justice Jose Perez guilty for less serious dishonesty for his role in luring court employees into investing their hard-earned money in a multi-million business scheme that turned out to be a scam.
In a 29-page en banc decision, the SC, through Associate Justice Alexander Gesmundo, penalized Ramdel Rey De Leon in the amount equivalent to his one year salary to be deducted from his benefits considering that he already resigned from the Court on April 30, 2015 and could no longer be suspended.
De Leon was also found guilty of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, violations of SC Administrative Circular No. 5-88, and Section 5 of Canon III (Conflict of Interest) and Section 1 of Canon IV (Performance of Duties) of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel.
The complaint was filed by former Court Attorney VI in the office of Justice Perez and now-Pili Regional Trial Court Judge Vivencio Gregorio Atutubo III, Deputy Division Clerk of Court Teresita Tuazon, and Court Attorneys Delight Aissa Salvador and Joevanni Villanueva.
The SC ruled that although there was no direct evidence to prove that De Leon was in partnership with his brother Rammyl and Ferdinand John Mendoza, there was still basis to hold him administratively liable for having acted as a recruiter for the “check-rediscounting” business venture.
“Indubitably, respondent actively participated in the series of transactions and dealings with complainants, from the time he accepted all the monies and placed it in the account of Mendoza. This constitutes as sufficient evidence to find that respondent had some involvement in the business of rediscounting checks as a ‘recruiter of third-party investors,’” the tribunal stressed.
Court records showed that in 2012 De Leon, taking advantage of his close friendship and trust with complainants, enticed them into parting with their money and investing in his alleged business transactions.
Based on the scheme as explained by De Leon, Mendoza was into check-rediscounting with suppliers/contractors of San Miguel Corporation.
He explained that SMC paid the suppliers of raw materials or other products after 90 days from the date the contract was awarded and/or upon compliance/completion of the contract.
These suppliers/contractors would then approach the agents of Mendoza for them to liquidate or sell the value of their contracts at a discounted price, so that they would be liquid and compliant with SMC’s requirements.
Thereafter, Mendoza would contact his brother and other people willing to pool in cash to accommodate the said contracts.
For all the capital investments, Mendoza would issue three post- dated checks – the first check to cover the principal, which would run and mature after 60 days, and the two subsequent checks to cover the five percent interest per month.
On June 18, 2014, the respondent said his brother informed him that Mendoza was already missing and was nowhere to be found.
The Court held that respondent is guilty of less serious dishonesty because he had not been honest in his dealings with the complainants.
“In spite of the knowledge regarding the collapsing investments and suspicious default payments of Mendoza, respondent continued to accommodate and accept the investments of complainants up to May 2014,” the Court pointed out.
