iE NPS investigation Form No. 01 s. 2008 Republic of the Philippines Department of Justice NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR ANGELES CITY, PAMPANGA INVESTIGATION DATA FORM wert. To be accomplished by the Office: DATE RECEIVED: - {\¥ 2D. NPS DOCKET No: (stamped and initiated): OA W-o- Wy. WJ - BED Time Received:® ‘Assigned 10. Receiving Staff: Date Assigned: To be accomplished by complainant/counselilaw enforcer: (Use back portion if space is not sufficient) COMPLAINANT/s: Name, Sex, Age & Address: MANILA EXPLORATION CO.-ANNEX, LTD REPRESENTED BY MS. LEA DEL ROSARIO MAYA-MAYA, and with address at #35-8 Sarita Street, Diamond Subdivision, Brey. Balibapo, Angeles City, Pampanga OFFENSE/s COMMITTED / LAW/s VIOLATED: Violation of Sections 31 in relation to Section 33 (D) and Section 33 (A) of the Electronic Commerce Act. DATE & TIME of COMMISSION: October 2008 1 Has a siviter complaint been fied before any other office?” 2.Is this complaintin the nature of a counter-charge?” 3.As this ‘complaint related to another case before this office?” RESPONDENT/s: Name, Sex, Age & Address: TONY BRYAN HORN, and_with address at Sapang Biabas, Dau, Mabalacat, Pampanga WITNESS/es: Name & Address Refer to the attached Affidavits of three witnesses. PLACE of COMMISSION Angeles City YES ___ NO YES __ NO yes Nox” CERTIFICATION* | CERTIFY, under oath, that all the bef, that | have not commenced any action or fled any claim invohing the same issues in any after leam that a formation on this sh @ tue and correct to the best of my knowledge and Court, tribunal, or quasi tar action has been fled andlor is pending, | shal eon hitCOMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT L LEAH C. DEL ROSARIO-MAYAMAYA, of legal age, married, Filipino, and with office address at #35-A Sarita St, Diamond Subdivision, Brgy. Balibago, Angeles City, Pampanga, after having-been duly swom to in accordance with law, hereby depose and state: 1. Lam the authorized representative of MANILA EXPLORATION SEX LTD; INC. (“MECO”), a limited partnership duly organized and existing under Philippine laws, with office address at Cityland Shaw Tower Unit 1116 St. Francis Street comer Shaw Boulevard, Mandaluyong City and #35-8 Sarita Street, Diamond Subdivision, Brgy. am duly authorized to execute this Complaint Affidavit in behalf of MECO by co. - Balibago, Angeles City, Pampanga. I virtue of the Partnership Resolution dated 15 October 2009 and Special Power of Attorney dated 16 October 2009, a copy of which are attached herein as Annexes “A” and “B", respectively. - 2. MECO is primarily organized to purchase real estate, secure leasehold rights or to enter into joint venture arrangements for the purpose of conducting exploratory drilling, electronic prospecting and exeavatory search for the ultimate recovery of precious metals, and other valuables located upon, within or below privately owned and/or public lands. A copy of MECO's Certificate of Registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission is hereto attached as Annex “ 3. A former independent consultant of MECO is Respondent MR. TONY HORN (“Respondent”), an American National and a pastor of Trinity Baptist Church based in Pampanga. Respondent's last known postal address is at Sapang Biabas, Dau, Mabalacat, Pampange. 4. Respondent was first introduced to Mr. Norman Haynes (“Mr. Haynes”), MECO’s limited partner, by a common friend and an investor ofMECO Mr. Lov L. Jordan. At that time, Respondent was looking for foreign sponsors to help him support his church and pursue his missionary works in the Philippines and throughout Asia. Being an active Christian missionary himself, Mr. Haynes extended his help by allowing Respondent to conduct bible studies and readings at the MECO compound in Angeles City, Pampanga. Eventually, Respondent became a close confidant and a good friend of Mr. Haynes and his family that Mr. Haynes offered Respondent a consultancy job in MECO. Thus, sometime in the second quarter of 2007, Respondent entered into an oral consultancy agreement with MECO through one of its partners, Mr. Haynes. % Respondent worked with MECO for more than one (1) year, initially as an independent consultant and adviser on matters relating to the business activities, undertaking and operations of MECO. However, as MECO’s operation grew, Mr. Haynes and his wife Mrs. Matilde Haynes (“Mrs. Haynes”), entrusted to Respondent the management of MECO’s branch office in Angeles City, Pampanga. This includes taking charge with the daily operations of MECO, custody of MECO funds and its disbursements. 6 It bears emphasis that at the time when Respondent was the one managing and administering the operations of MECO, he exerted efforts to take hold of and access important files, documents and electronic data of MECO which are highly confidential and can only be accessed by MECO’s partners, specifically Mr. Haynes. In fact, Ms. Shayne A. Fairbanks (Ms. Fairbanks”), Mz. Hynes! personal secretary personally saw Respondent going over her desk and Grawers, pulling out pertinent files and documents, without her consent and definitely without the knowledge and consent of Mz. Haynes. Attached es Annex “D” hereof is the Affidavit of Ms. Fairbanks dated 16 October 2009, attesting to the forgoing fact. 7. Sometime on October 2008, Ms. Geene F. Villareal “Ms. Villareal”), an employee of MECO, saw Respondent and Mr. Neal Cortez (“Mr. Cortez”), whom Respondent personally hired to be his assistant, and is known to have extensive knowledge in computers, forcibly dismantling one of MECO’sdata, specifically the passwords needed to access the client and investor profiles and accounts of MECO. Moreover, on several occasions, Mr. Cortez was seen by some MECO employees including Ms. Fairbanks and Ms. Reina Rose M. Valencia (“Ms. Valencia”), copying the files and date stored in MECO computers. Respondent did all of these acts without the authority from neither MECO nor anyone from its partners. Attached as Annex “E” hereof is the Joint-Affidavit of ‘Ms. Villareal and Ms. Valencia, attesting to the foregoing fact. 8 As a result of Respondent's unauthorized removal of the hard drive, MECO was not able to use the computer since the essential files and mainframe program contained therein were missing. More importantly, the entire payroll system failed to operate because of illegal and unauthorized access and copying done by Respondent. 9. After the above incidents occurred, Respondent suspiciously and suddenly intimated his intention of terminating his services with MECO. Sometime on October 2008, and after Respondent and Mr. Cortez surreptitiously stole MECO files, documents and electronic data, Respondent formally announced his intention to terminate his services before the MECO partners and other consultants, which was accepted by MECO sometime in December 2008 after Respondent arrived from his vacation in Israel. 10. Shortly thereafter, an inventory audit was conducted by MECO. In the said audit, it was found out that several important files and documents, including the hard drive of MECO, were missing. Likewise, two (2) unit of Clone Notebook laptop and a desktop computer with their corresponding accessories awere unaccounted for after Respondent left MECO. At this point, Mr. and Mrs. Haynes investigated and confronted all MECO employees regarding the missing office files, documents, hard drive, and the laptop and desktop computers. Thereupon, Ms. Villareal, Ms. Valencia and Ms. Fairbanks, revealed that on various occasions, they saw Respondent, alone or accompanied by his personal assistant Mr. Cortez, took out the hard drive of the computer and copied MECO’s files toa USB Memory stick.ll. sate, the sensitive and confidential information copied from MECO’s hard ad computers consist of MECO’s organizational databases, payroll system, list of clients and investors and more importantly, the passwords needed to access each and every client and investor Profiles and accounts, which Respondent would NOT be authorized and NEVER have official access to. In fact, these sensitive and confidential information consist of trade secrets and Proprietary information of MECO, such that only Mr. and Ms. Haynes, being the ‘owners of MECO, are authorized to access, 12. Clearly, the act of Respondent in dismantling the computer CPU and removing therein the hard drive for the purpose of copying the electronic files stored therein, as well as the unauthorized copying of confidential files and passwords is an act punishable under the provisions of Republic Act 8792 also known as the “Electronic Commerce Act of 2000” (“E-Commerce Act”). A, RESPONDENT IS LIABLE FOR THE CRIME OF HACKING OR CRACKING AS DEFINED UNDER THE ELECTRONIC COMMERCE ACT OF 2000. 13. From the foregoing, it is crystal clear that Respondent committed a violation of the E-Commerce Act, as defined under the following provision: “SECTION 33 (a) - Hacking or cracking which refers to unauthorized access into or interference in a computer system/server or information and communication system; or any access in order to corrupt, alter, steal, or destroy using a computer or other similar information and communication devices, without the knowledge and consent of the owner of the computer or information and communication system, including the introduction of computer viruses and the like, resulting in the corruption, destruction, alteration, theft or loss of electronic data messages or electronic documents shall be punished by a minimum fine of One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) and a maximum commensurate to the damage incurred and