e 6 NPS Investgxtion Farm: Naf x 2005 e| wv IE Republic of the Phisppioes 1B f Department of Justice TIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR MANDALUYONG CY INVESTIGATION DATA FORM To be accomplished by the Office: DATE RECEIVED: cre NPS DOCKET NO: (stamoed and initiated): XV- 06. INV -OGK 61055 Time Received: Assigned to: Receiving Staff: Date Assigned: To be accomplished by complainant/counsel/law enforcer: (Use back portion if space is not sufficient) COMPLAINANTIs: Name, Sex, Age & Address RESPONDENT/s: Name, Sex, Age & Address MANILA EXPLORATION CO. ~ANNEX.LTD._ TONY Bi nal | 208 ani MECO), Unit 1116 Citviand Shaw Tower, St resident of Sanang Biabas, Dau, Mabalacet, Francis St cor. Shaw Bivd., Mandaluvong City Pampanga and Spouses NORMAN HAYNES and MATILDE HAYNES. both of legal age, and boih residents of ini Gardenridge Condominiur WITNESS/es: Name & Address Corporation, Bray. lava, EDSA, Mandaluyong SHAYNE FAIRBANKS and JONATHAN B. CRUZ Git both with office address at # 35-8 Sarita St, iam visi br it ingeles. OFFENSE/s COMMITTED / LAWis VIOLATED: City, Pampan: LIBEL under Articles 353 and 355 of the Revi JERRY BRADFORI s it Diamon: Penal Code Subsivision, Baibago, Angeles City. Pampanga DATE & TIME of COMMISSION: PLACE of COMMISSION August-October 2009 Mandaluyong City ~ Angeles City imilat Complaint been fled before any other office?" YES ___ NO_X. 2.'s this complaint in the nature: ‘of a counter-charge?” YES ____NO_X_ If yes, indicate details below this complaint retated to another case before this office?” YES __ NO_X. if yes, indicate details below: CERTIFICATION* WE CERTIFY, under oath, that all the information on this sheet are true and correct to the best of our knowiadge ‘2nd delief, that we have not commenced any action or filed any Claim involving the same issues in any Court, tribunal, or 2S: judiea! agency, and that if we shoud thersafter leam x action has been fled andlor is pending ‘port ghat fact to this Honorable Offce within five (5) days ‘rom our knowledge thereof , Metro Manila.DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR Mandaluyong City MANILA EXPLORATION co. ANNEX, LTD., NORMAN HAYNES. and MATILDE HAYNES, SN Complainants, For: Libel under of Articles 353 and 355 of the under the Revised - versus - Penal Code. TONY BRIAN HORN, Respondent. COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT We NORMAN HAYNES and MATILDE HAYNES, American and Filipino, respectively, both of legal age, married and both with residence address at Unit 11-B Gateway Gardenridge Condiminium Corporation, Brgy., aya, Edsa, Mandaluyong City, Metro Manila, having been duly swom to in accordance with law, hereby depose and state: 1. We are filing this Complaint-Affidavit in our respective personal capacities, and as partners of MANILA EXPLORATION CO. - ANNEX, LTD. (/MECO”), a Limited Partnership duly organized and existing under Philippine laws, with business addresses at Unit 1116 Cityland Shaw Tower, Saint Francis Street comer Shaw Blvd., Mandaluyong City, Metro Manila and #35-5 Sarita Street, Diamond Subdivision, Brey. Balibago, Angeles City, Pampanga. 2. MECO is principally engaged in the business of conducting exploratory drilling, electronic prospecting, and excavation search for the discovery of potable water, or precious metals, and other valuables located upon, within or below privatelycorned meal estaee, public lends/ waters. and real estate purchased by MECO, and any Get acs, activites of endertsking reasonably required or necessary to carry out the foregoing purposes. A copy of MECO’s Amended Certificate of Registration is attached hereof as Annex “A“. 3. _ A former independent consultant of MECO is Respondent MR. TONY BRIAN HORN (“Respondent”), an American National and a pastor of Trinity Baptist Church. Respondent's last known postal address is at Sapang Biabas, Dau, Mabalacat, Pampanga 4 Respondent was first introduced by a common friend and an investor of MECO Mr. Bob 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 missionaries ourselves we extended help to Respondent by allowing him to conduct bible studies and readings at the MECO compound in Angeles City, Pampanga. Eventually, Respondent became our close confidant and good friend. Taking advantage of our friendship, Respondent asked if we could give him a part-time job at MECO considering that he has no visible source of income at that time. Thus, sometime in the second quarter of 2007, Respondent entered into an oral consultancy agreement with MECO. 5. Respondent worked with MECO for more than one (1) year as consultant and adviser on matters relating to the business activities, undertaking and operations of MECO. 6. Thus, Respondent inevitably had access to the business files and documents of MECO, including those stored in the computer, considering that we fullyeposed ocr trust and conficience to Respondent, owing to the fact that Respondent mas 2 pastor and is actively taking part in Bible Missions all over the country. 7. Sometime in the month of April 2007 and onwards, several of MECOS office files and documents, such as its payroll register and contract of employment began to disappear and were unaccounted for. Although there were some rumors circulating within the office of MECO in Angeles City, Pampanga that Respondent was the one who surreptitiously took the missing files, we did not believe then that Respondent is capable of doing such despicable acts. However, the talks among our employees privy in the day to day operation of MECO in Angeles City office had persisted, pointing to Respondent as the culprit in the disappearance of MECO’s files. In fact, one of the employees of MECO, Ms. Shayne A. Fairbanks (“Ms. Fairbanks”), personally saw Respondent took out her files and documents from her drawer without her consent and that of the Partnership. Upon inspection of her drawer she found out that MECO’s SEC Certificate of Registration, land titles, official receipt/certificate of registration of several cars, and other documents were already missing. A copy of Ms. Fairbanks’s Swom Affidavit dated 16 October 2009 attesting to the foregoing incidents is attached hereof as Annex “B” 8. It must be emphasized that Ms. Fairbanks personally reported the afore- mentioned incidents to us. Since then, we became wary of the real motive of Respondent in taking out MECO’s files without our knowledge and consent. Let it be mentioned that after the aforementioned incidents, Respondent had repeatedly intimated to us his intention of terminating his services with MECO because of his overwhelming church related activities which, according to Respondent, being the head of the Trinity Baptist Church his presence and attention are badly needed.Ge Cette ANE, we finally decided to accept the long ovenize sesigratiom of Respondent Thus, when Respondent arrived from his vacation in Exec, he was accordingly told that his resignation was accepted and he has until the end of the month to move out his personal things from the office. 10. Shortly after Respondent left MECO, an inventory audit was conducted by the MECO’s Inventory Department. In the said audit, it was found out that several important files and documents were missing. Likewise, two (2) unitS of Clone Notebook laptop and a desktop computer with their corresponding accessories were unaccounted for. At this point, we investigated and confronted our employees regarding the missing office files, documents, and the laptop and desktep computers. ‘Thereupon, MECO’s employees, Ms. Geene F. Villareal “Ms, Villareal”), Ms. Riena Rose M. Valencia (Ms. Valencia”), including Ms. Fairbanks, revealed that on various occasions they respectively saw Respondent, alone or accompanied by his personal assistant Mr. Neal Cortez (”Mr. Cortez”), take out the hard drive of the computer, copied MECO’s files therein using a USB Memory stick. When we asked why they did not immediately report these incidents to us, Mr. Villareal and Ms. Valencia answered that they did not directly report the incidents to us then because they were afraid of what Respondent might do. Ms. Villareal and Ms. Valencia told us that they opted to remain silent rather than suffer the resulting consequences if they revealed Respondent's criminal acts. In addition, sometime on October 2008 barely a few days after we told Respondent that his resignation was accepted, MECO’s Security ‘Administrator Jonathan B. Cruz (Mr. Cruz”) saw Respondent coming out from the office with a computer and some assorted documents and loaded the same into his car. Mr. Cruz did not ask Respondent why he was taking out the computers and assorted documents and loading the same to his car, because Mr. Cruz thought then thatFespendece was stil connected with MECO. Attached hereof is the Swom AtSten= of Me Coaras Annex “C, attesting to the foregoing facts 1 ‘True enough. on 01 October 2009, the above-mentioned items were found under the possession! and custody of Respondent when a team of Philippine National Police-Regional Special Operations Group (PNP-RSOG) of PRO3, Camp Olivas, San Fernando, Pampanga, headed by Police Inspector Norberto S. Murillo (“Insp. Murillo”) searched his residence at Sapang Biabas, Dau, Mabalacat, Pampanga, by virtue of the Search Warrant issued by the Honorable Executive Judge Ramon D. Pamular of Regional Trial Court-Third Judicial Region, Guimba, Nueva Ecija. Copies of the Search “Warrant dated 01 October 2009 and Seizure Receipt issued by PNP-RSOG, PROS, Camp Olivas, San Fernando, Pampanga are hereof attached es Annexes “D“ and “E*. In fact, a criminal Complaint for Qualified Theft under Article 310 of the Revised Penal Code was filed against Respondent and pending before the Oifice of the Provincial Prosecutor of Angeles City, Pampanga. 12. Ithas to be emphasized that when Respondent resigned from MECO, he was given the amount of TEN THOUSAND US. DOLLAR ($10,000.00), as a sort of incentive for his consultancy service with MECO. Altough we were advised by our counsel that an independent contractor such as Respondent who voluntarily resigns from his engagement is not entitled to the benefits under the Labor Code of the Philippines, because Respondent is not an employee, nevertheless the partnership still gave him the foregoing amount out of goodwill. Attached hereof as Annex “F” is the copy of the Acknowledgment Receipt which indicates that Respondent received the foregoing amount. 13. All the while, we thought that when Respondent voluntarily severed his selationship with MECO it was made in good faith. In fact, when Respondent was givenby MECO the Sancial incentive in he amount of TEN THOUSAND US DOLLARS (SOUND be was very Seeded to my sping Get Ge eet Se Fee generondy gave to ham will hip 2 lot in the expenses fox bis family's datty scbessteace as well as his expenses in carrying out the mission of Trinity Baptist Church: However. sometime in the month of June or July 2009, Respondent, out of nowhere, demanded that he be paid with a whooping amount of TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND US. DOLLAR ($250,000.00), otherwise he would be fling case with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) allegedly for illegal dismissal and non-payment of Tabor benefits. He also threatened to communicate with MECO’s foreign investors and tell them that MECO is a scam or pseudo-partnership. He also threatened to post ¢ damaging article relating to the operations of MECO in his blogsite trinitybaptisiphilippinesblogspotcom and that he would also create a pseudo blogsite/website to discredit and besmirch MECO and our person. 44, When we refused to give in to the demands of Respondent, knowing fully wwoll that these demands were utterly baseless and clearly extortion, Respondent carried out his threat. Respondent, with evident bad faith and without any basis whatsoever, maliciously posted at trinitvbaptistphilippines blogspot.com a malicious article dated 08 october 2009 entitled “Great Struggles Here, Plase Pray”. A printed copy of the article i attached hereof as Annex “G”, For reference, the pertinent parts of the Article deted 08 October 2009 are reproduced below: “They also started a new company that was funded By MECO called OpSec International Group Inc and said that I would be working for this “daughter Company”, reluctantly took the job in order to Help while Norman took a feto weeks to reaover. xx xxX exxxx xxux Weeks tumed into months and months turned into years and I ons still responsible to distributing the funds and was then forced to iwork longer days. There was « time tohen a worker came in to my office and eae earch advance (this is when they need their paycheck earlier than theseguir pang). Hie said that Is som ws sick em hee could not afford to tate som ip the Doct. He matted for hours im the rain in order to have the hope of meng IES Som to the Doctor. Finally, | gave kim the monty out of my spect aad Sod hare & Sc Fas som fo fine Doctor. This really disturbed me that hese Falgpems workers didn't even have insurance that was afforded to hex By lew once they work om a job for more that 6 months. I Norman Haynes and his son Hunter and the others on the board about providing insurance, health benefits and retirement or the employees that is afforded to them by Philippine Law. This became a source of many heated arguments between me and the staff of "CO. I on, one hand wanting to follow the laws and them, on the other hand wanting cheap labor. This went on for several months as they promised me that they would provide the insurance and retirement but every week when the paycheck would come, still no benefits. I left on October 11, 2008 for a vacation to Jerusalem and when I returned on October 25, | contacted Norman and he told me not to come back to work. L was not authorized to enter back into the work compound so I just left my personal belongings there and let with no problems. About a month had passed by and I called Norman and told him that His son Hunter had committed ¢ help with our Myanmar Mission trip and asked if he was still going to follow through with his commitment and Norman said that he was unaware o that but he would honor his son’s promise and gave me Money for the Trip. About @ week went by and I had heard that they has told people that I had extorted the money that they had given me for the Mission Trip. | called Norman and Asked if { could meet him and ke said yes. My family and 1 went to His office and | told them that I had heard that someone has been saying that I had extoried the funds you gave me for the mission trip, so, I am here to return the funds, | pushed the funds across the table and said, “just keep the funds 1 don't need them” and He responded, “You didn't extort those funds, I gave them to you or the Lord’s work. I don’t know who said that but just keep it and help the ‘Myanmar People.” He spoke politely to me and sent me on my way encouraging ime as te left and telling me lat there is no problem. While I was gone to Myanmar in January a group of employees went down and filed a labor case for being wrongfully dismissed from their job at OpSec. One of them was the president of the OpSec Company, Romeo Velasquez. After filing the case, they told Romy that they would settle the labor dispute with tim and he could meet them in Manla and get the settlement. When Romy arrived there, they had several plain clothes individual arrest Romy and ‘Accused him for extortion. Romy, being scared and not wanting to stay in jail was forced to sign a statement that I was the Master mind behind the labor dispute. Following the release of Romy, he came to my house and told me what had happened and 1 just told him not to worry about it, it’s not that big of @ deal. Then in April, OpSe/MECO management sent a letter addressed to my church stating that I had stolen some money as well as Documents. I ‘told them that we could go to the court system and they could bring the evidence, but they did not want that. They were afraid that the Government would. find out that they had gotten money rom the states maybe, I'm not sure. So a week went by and I contacted ‘Norman through an American Worker there named Keith Nichols and told him to tell Norman to come to my church and explain the letter and to apologize. Norman refused to do that, so in order to put pressure om hin to repent, I filed a labor case of my own which would be in the amount of $250,000.00. After filing the labor case, they contacted me and 1 told themees Fell shout = Fi ozs wt Normen sti] refesed He beomer mrecse as hie Seger oo oer Documents and when they would tell a lie, I would show the Labor Board a document that would stop that lie. This went om for a fear montis. me defending myself with the documents that I had kept for my personal records. And finally I realized that Norman would not come to the church and remove the letter from our church books so I wrote some o the investors that Invest in the Company. I wrote them the following message... To all Involved and also to my Supporters and workers in the Kingdom, J would like to begin by telling the MECO investors That I realize that I have never contacted you and possibly you have never heard of mie. But, For some reason | ant receiving an influx of emails from people { don't even know and that don't know me from the place I use to work. What many of you are unaware of, is that Norman (Mi ious employer) in blaming me tortio: which is the farthest thing from the truth. I had been fired from Opsee (Nonnan' company that no one ever seems to know about when I mention id) and left without saying a word. Norman began telling everyone that I was trying to extort money, | went and confronted Norman and told him to Please quit talking about me. I had even told many, Like Keith and Jerry to please tell Norman and Hunter to stop including my name in MECO business mectings. What many of the Investors are unaware of is that I am a Pastor of ¢ church and have planted Several churches throughout Asia. I have never solicited funds of used Jesus to prosper Monetarily. Matter of fact 1 sold ail my personal belongings to build the church here in the Philippines. Norman will say that Satan is using his “tools” to stop the progress of recovery, when in Fact I am Daily Serving the Lord!iti!! Around April This year, Norman Cronies sent a le to my church (not my house) and addressed it to church and told that | had Stolen Money and Documents. Tread the Letter sent to the Church during the evening Service in both Church locations and by regulation of our Church Bylaws the letter was put in the Church minutes and Log book. I informed Norman through Keith that I wanted Hint, Hunter, Jo Jo and the Attny that sent the letter to my church to come to the church and prove that I had stolen the items or tell the Church there had been a mistake in sending the letter (ATTN ATTN ATTN NO MONEY INVOLVED,). Hunter Said that he would never do that. So it puts me in a defensive position (all things that 1 am doing in court is a Defense Not an offensive move). I ant defending My testimony with each move I make. Since Nonnan ha: that 1 am evil and extorti on mary occasions to the investors, I thought that I would appeal to the investors for Him to Restore and give me the things owed to me. xx xxx XXXXX xxxxxI told Norman to simply come and inform the church that they made a mistake. yet through His prideful heart he refused. therefore T must tell you and all the other investors, "I refuse to compromise, Norman will come to my church and explain his actions in front of my congregation and tell them of the lies he told about me." He will give me thes ale ix Sek ca gePieris lew and my contract price that he cheated me out of zepiy. I was mot asking for the overtis ‘contract wi ‘tumtected Norman about the church issue. I was going to forgive and about the contract and he yet he still xxrxrr xxxxx xxxxx! will not stop fill he tells the truth, If he continues to call me an extortioner. so be it. it will be on his shoulders not mine. | will gladly put my testimony against His any day!!! If I have to stand alone I will. I understand that everyone else is concerned about their investment, but my concern is iter joney.XXXXX xxxXX After receiving the letter, they began flooding Norman's office with letters and email telling him to come to the Church and also they stopped sending money. Norman was so angry that he began to talk about me on the voice recorded reports that he post on the internet. Again Norman contacted me and said please forgive me and I told him, I will forgive you if you come to the Church and explain the letter you sent and give me the agreed labor dispute. Again, Norman refused. I decided that I would come back to the states in October and get some advice from A Lawyer Friend of mine on how to handle it legally as weil as visit some of the churches while 1 was there. Thad announced in my church that I might be gone the Whole Month of October and that I teas returning to the states. I guess Norman Haynes thought that I cas going to tell the Government of his scam here so on Thursday hired to police to arrest ou o that here, if yor 1¢ enough money) in order to stop my trip. The problem is I think they are out to Kill me cause they could not keep me in jail on the false charges. I need help.” [Emphasis and underscoring supplied] 13. We were greatly alarmed and astounded when we read the article because it never came into our mind that Respondent would ever say these libelous, malicious, defamatory, and false statements, considering that he heads a church and preaches the words of God, much more, posted the article in the blogsite of his church. This only shows that Respondent is only using his church for personal gain and interest 16. _ In the article, Respondent falsely claimed that we started and funded a new company called OPSEC and that we promised him with a job thereto. The truth being that OPSEC, as shown in its Certificate of Registration, was incorporated on September 2006, thus, Respondent was merely concocting story because at the time he was engaged by MECO as consultant on 2007, OPSEC WAS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE.MECO’s reistoestep with OPSEC is purely business. Let it be said that OPSECs sertices mere engaged by MECO merely to manage its daily operations. A copy of (OPSECs Asticies of Incorporation is attached hereof as Annex “H“. 17. There is likewise no truth to Respondent's accusation that he was forced to worked for longer days. This cannot be so, otherwise his church would be deprived of his time. For this reason, we only accommodated his part-time job in MECO because he cannot work full time, considering the fact that he heads the Trinity Baptist Church. His work there obviously requires considerable attention and time. In fact, Respondent, most of the time, would stay at the office for about four (4) or five (5) hours only, and he was in the office for only three (3) or four (4) days in a week, save when there were urgent matters that needed his presence. Thus, Respondent hes no basis, in truth and fact, to claim that he was “cheated” of his overtime benefit. 18. Respondent, with evident bad faith and for the purpose of disparaging the reputation of MECO and our persons, made a false story to make it appear that we are insensitive, oblivious and unmindfu! of the plight and needs of our employees, when he stated in his article that “There was a time when a worker came in to my office and asked fora Cash advance (this is when they need their paycheck earlier than the regular payday). He said that his son was sick and he could not afford to take his son to the Doctor. He waited for hours in the rain in order to have the hope of taking his Son to the Doctor”. Respondent clearly was referring to one of MECO’s employees. This statement, the falsity of which is evident, is one which Respondent wrote to damage us. 19. Respondent, in his very glaring fabrication of facts, evidently for the sole purpose of besmirching the good name of MECO and our persons, claim that we did not insure our employees and that we did not provide our employees with retirementplace, there is no provision in the Labor Code or im any other Laer which recumes mandatory insurance coverage of employees. As to the reGrement beneSt 2 cron Se prerogative of the employer to grant retirement benefit to his employees apart from the statutory retirement benefits granted by the Labor Code. MECO’s employees are given. their salaries in accordance with the statutory minimum wage imposed by law and the employees are duly covered by Social Security System (68S) and PHILHEALTH. Respondent should have known this fact because he was immersed with these matters as MECO's consultant during the time we were in our Quezon City office or outside the Philippines meeting with investors. Yet, Respondent purposely twisted the facts to suit his evil intentions against MECO and us. In this regard, copies of Receipts of payments and contributions with $8$ and PHILHEALTH are attached hereof as Annexes “I to I- 19” and “J to J-8 “, respectively 20. Insofar as Respondent's allegation that he was not allowed to enter the premises of MECO in Angeles City after he resigned on 25 October 2008, this is completely false, as he was never prohibited to do so. It must be noted that Respondent still has some personal belongings left in MECO’s office then. In Annex “C", which is the Sworn Affidavit of Mr. Cruz, Mr. Cruz declares under oath in his Affidavit that he allowed Respondent to enter the premises of MECO and that Respondent took and loaded into his car computer units and assorted company’s documents. Clearly, Respondent made this false allegation in order to portray us 2s insensitive, cruel, inhuman, pitiless and wicked. 21. With regard to the alleged illegal dismissal of several employees of OPSEC and its former President Mr. Romeo Velasquez (“Mr. Velasquez”) and his (Mr. Velasquez) purported arrest for alleged extortion, Respondent's statements are utterly a aHappen we centainiy fhad nothing to do with them given the fact, as stated above, that wee ce nether Excoxporsioss nor stockholders nor employees of OPSEC. Thas Respondent's accusation that we finger pointed him as the instigator of the labor Gispute between OPSEC, its rank and file employees and Mr. Velasquez, is definitely a product of Respondent's wild imagination. To be sure, Respondent would like to make it appear to MECO’s foreign investors and those who will read his article posted at ttinitybapbtistphilippines blogspot.com that we are violators of the rights of the workers. 22 The more glaring lie in Respondent's narration of events in his article was the alleged letter sent to his church purportedly by “OPSEC/MECO management”, which letter allegedly contained statements that Respondent stole money from OPSEC or MECO. As far as we can remember we have never sent a letter to this effect to Respondent's church or to Respondent himself. The truth is, as informed by OPSEC when we communicated to them regarding the matter, OPSEC through its counsel Atty. Mylene A. Yturralde-Chan and upon its instruction, sent 2 demand Letter dated 16 March 2009. The said Demand Letter was specifically addressed to Respondent and NOT to Trinity Baptist Church. Even so, as can be gleaned from the tenor of the Demand Letter, Respondent was not recklessly and baselessly accused of criminal misdeed, as OPSEC would have not demanded the accounting and return of the amount under the custody then of Respondent if it has no valid and legal ground. Worthy of note is the fact that the demand upon Respondent to account and return the money, as well as the documents, was made in black and white, as this is the legal and permissible action to take upon one who hes valid claim with another. This was proven to be true as the search conducted in the house of Respondent yielded not only the personal properties of MECO, but likewise included some documents indicated by(CESSC bs Demand Letter dated 16 March 2009 to Respondent. In fact, Respondent Se Bs etic, aceite that he has with him some documents of MECO, and he even ‘Sirestened os that he will submit the documents to Government, because according to him the documents contained incriminating matters. Copy of OPSEC’s Demand Letter is hereto attached as Annex “K“. 23. Evidently and grossly, Respondent committed bad faith when he twisted the facts and circumstances relating to the Demand Letter sent to him by OPSEC, which demanded that he account for and return the money he apparently embezzled and the documents he unlawfully took from OPSEC. Ineluctably, Respondent has no other purpose in doing so but to undermine and malign the reputation of MECO and us in the eyes of the business community here in the Philippines and in the eyes of our foreign investors. | 24 What is more disparaging in Respondent's atticle is his accusation that MECO is a SCAM. If indeed MECO is a scam, it follows that the partnership is also scam. If this és so, Respondent is NOT a true preacher of the words of God but a scumbag, because he was s part of MECO for more than a year. Moreover, Respondent's claims that he wes illegally dismissed and denied labor benefits by MECO is not sensible, because when he invoked the protection of the law for the recovery of his alleged unpaid benefits itis understood that MECO is opercting above- board. Annexes “I to 1-19” and “J 10 J-8, which are the receipts of MECO’s payments and contributions to SSS and PHILHEALTH, are the best evidence that MECO is operating legally. It bears emphasis that MECO has been in existence for more than eight (8) years now without any complaint from its investor. In fact, not a single case has ever been filed questioning the legal existence of MECO or its operation. In addition, copies ofprove thet the Partnership is operating legally are attached herent as Ammeses “EL ani 2. Disturbingly, Respondent even Ebelousiy accused us of Leaving 2 pian wo kill him. Not even a presentation of occurrence will reasonably justify his statement We are not capable of doing such criminal act because we are not bloodthirsty. This accusation is, without a doubt, a malicious imputation of criminal act because Respondent had no basis to accuse us of such felonious act. 25. Finally, worthy of emphasis is Respondent's assertion that WE OWED him the sum of money amounting to TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND US. DOLLAR ($250,000.00), which is allegedly the total amount of his unpeid labor benelits. This ridiculous claim is clearly a trumped-up, absolutely false and intended as leverage by Respondent against us. Up to now, Respondent has never filed a labor case against MECO. For better appreciation, the pertinent part of the article is hereby reproduced, to wit “x x x Norman refused to do that, so in order to put pressure on him to repent, I filed a labor case of my own which would be in the amount of $250,000.00. After filing the labor case, they contacted me and I told them that If Norman comes to my church and explains the letter and apologizes, I will forget a Money he owes me and Drop the case, XXX XXXXX xx x He will give me the funds he owes me, Which is my overtime pay afforded to ilippine law et ice t! ingly, I was not asking for the overtime and contract when I first contacted Norman about the church issue, ] was going to forgive and forget about the contract and money he owes, yet he still refused). xxx XXXXX I understand that everyone else is concerned about their investment, but my concern is far greater than money, x x x x x” [Emphasis and underscoring supplied]27 AS can be easily Geaned from Ge Seeeguing sete Boe be Se oaciaded ut the icxuicas sec we aged: ee S Papeder socerce: fabrication, because # indeed he is legally ented t sack buge sum, be should Reve vigorously demanded payment from us without any condition. as this is the nocmal reaction of one whose rights have been violated. 28. Adding more insult to his clearly libelous remarks, not only did Respondent malign, besmirch and defame the reputation of MECO and our persons, he likewise maligned, besmirched, defamed and insulted the dignity of the Republic of the Philippines and the citizens of the Philippines, when he said this following statement, “. I guess Norman Haynes thought that I was going to tell the Government of his scam here so on Thursday hired to police to arrest me (you can o that here, if vou have enough money) int order to stop my trip.”. Such statement clearly depicts how Respondent regards the Philippines, its government, its laws, and its citizen. 29. Respondent made good of his threat to create a blogsite, apart from the blogsite of Trinity Baptist Church, as we came across with a blogsite cleverly named “mecomirage.blogspot.com”. This blogsite was traced to have been set up by Respondent with the intent of besmirching the reputation of MECO and us. Furthermore, this discovery was bolstered by the fact that several investors received a copy of the blog entries from an e-mail address tonyshorn@ gmail.com, which is the e- mail address of Respondent. As proof of the existence of this pseudo blogsite, a copy of the Sworn Affidavit of Jerry Bradford, an American National and investor of MECO, is attached hereof as Annex “N" attesting to the fact that Respondent is the author and creator of the pseudo blogsite. The existence of this pseudo blogsite explained the numerous inquiries made by the investors and clients relating to the real and official MECO’s websiteSR cee of he Hing ets om thee ite of mecomiizage blogspotcom dated es eed erect is the pent copy of the libelous articies as Annex mor aed he DD copy 2s Annex “O-1"), there appears 2 deceptively similar and Respondent that he semawe the maces etcie Soe the biogstte of Sirhan hones Here ee os wel os Se ee in the pseudo Mogsite, Respondent arrogantiy and cbstinateiy refused so remove Se articles and continuously to refuse remove the seid articles. Hence, this present Complaint for Libel under Articles 353 and 355 of the | Revised Penal Code is hereby filed before this Honorable Office. 34. We are advised and verily believe that Respondent is undoubtedly criminally liable for Libel under Article 353 and 355 of the Revised Penal Code, to wit “Art. 353. Definition of itel. — A libel is public and malicious imputation of acrime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the di discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead. XXXXX Libel means by writings or similar means. — A libel committed by means of writing, printing, lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph, painting, theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or_anv similar means, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods or a fine ranging from 200 to 6,000 pesos, or both, in addition to the civil action which may be brought by the offended party.” [Emphasis and underscoring supplied] 35, In the case of Jejomar C. Binay vs. The Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 170643, 08 September 2006 citing the case MVRS Pub, Inc. vs. Da’wak Council of the Phils. Inc., GR. No. 135306, 444 Phil 230, 241 (2003), the Supreme Court gave the definition of defamatory language: “In MVRS Pub. Inc, v. Islamic Da'teah Council of the Phils, Ine., we defined defamatory language in this wise: Defamation, which includes libel and slander, means the offense of injuring a 's character, fi reputation. fi jous statements. It is that which tends to injure the esteem, res ood_will_orunderstood by persons reading them, unless it appears that they were used and understood in another sense.” [Emphasis and underscoring supplied] 36. In the same case of Jejomar C. Binay, supra, the elements of Libel were likewise given, to wit (a) an imputation of a discreditable act or condition to another; (b) publication of the imputation; (©) identity of the person defamed; and (d) the existence of malice. 37. On the first clement, the Respondent imputed upon the partnership and us various discreditable acts, such as violations of pertinent provisions of the Labor Code, that the partnership is a fraud or scam, our purported desire to kill the Respondent, among others. These imputations are not only outright false, they are also imputation of acts which are criminally punishable under the Labor Code and Revised Penal Code. 38, Itshould be stressed that an allegation made by a person against another is considered defamatory if it ascribes to the latter the commission of a crime; the possession of a vice or defect, whether real or imaginary; or any act, omission, condition, status or circumstance which tends to dishonor or discredit or put him ingentempt, or which tends to blacken the memory of one who & dead Gisdece Brillante vs. Court of Appeals, etal. GR Nos 118737 & 12571, 7 Ccmber 2} 39. On the second element, there can be no dispute that the malicious aricie of Respondent appeared in the blogsite of trinitvbaptistphilippines blogspot.com as evidenced by Annex “G“, which is the printed copy of the defamatory article Moreover, another set of malicious articles are found in the pseudo mecomirage.bl com. 40. Onthe third element, Respondent, by the simple perusal of the contents of the article, clearly and repeatedly identified MECO and us as the author of the afore- mentioned discreditable, malicious and criminal acts. 41. _ In the case of Ogie Diaz vs. People of the Philippines, GR. No. 159787, 28 May 2007, the Supreme Court explained the import of “identity of the person defamed” in this wise: “The last element of libel is that the victim is identified or identifiable from the contents of the libelous article. In order to maintain a libel suit, it is essential that the victim be identifiable, although it is not necessary that the person be named. It is enough if by intrinsic reference the allusion is apparent or if the publication contains matters of description or reference to facts and circumstances from which others reading the article mav know the person alluded to, or if the latter is pointed out by extraneous circumstances so thi ing such. and did understand that he was the person referred to. Kunkle v. Cableriews- American and L id the rule that this requirement is complied with w on recogni identify the party vilified in the article.” [Emphasis and underscoring supplied] 42. On the last element, Respondent, as established above, acted with malice because he imputed to MECO and us, although the name of Ms. Haynes was not categorically and directly mentioned. Being the managing partner of MECO her personcommitted various acts, which he knows very well os baseless Gise, Sumpeda> aad concoction. 43. _ In the same case of Ogie Diaz, supra, the Supreme Court had this to sey on the element of “malice”, to wit: “As to the element of malice, we find that since on its face the article is defamatory, there is a presumption that the offender acted with malice In Article 354 of the same Code, evel f od to be ici even if it be true, if intentio1 justifiable motive for making it is shown, There is malice when the author of the imputation is ympted. - and speaks not in response to duty but merely to injure the reputation of the person who claims to have been defamed.” Emphasis and underscoring supplied] 44. On the basis of the foregoing asseverations, Respondent, without a doubt, is criminally for Libel under Articles 353 and 355 of the Revised Penal Code. 45. Since we are bona-fide residents of Mandaluyong City, this instant Complaint-Affidavit for Libel under Articles 353 and 355 of the Revised Penal Code is being filed before this Honorable Office, pursuant to Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code. 46, For purposes of service of subpoena and other processes, the last known address of Respondent MR. TONY BRIAN HORN is at Sapang Biabas, Dau, Mabalacat, Pampanga 47. This Complaint-Affidavit has been executed to support the filing of criminal case against MR. TONY BRIAN HORN for Libel under Articles 353 and 355 of the Revised Penal Code Further, Affiant sayeth naught.SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 5* day joverhber 2009 at Mandaluyong City. Affidavit; that | am satisfied that the affiants understood their that they executed the same of their own free will.COMPANY REG. NO. APO95-00730 KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: THIS Is TO CERTIFY that the annexed Amended Articles of Partnership of: MANILA EXPLORATION CO. - ANNEX, LTD. has been presented to the Commission at 4:08 2G" day of January, 2007, according to Entry Day Book and duly recorded in Folio 66 Leaf 3 Yelume No. IV of the Bock of Partnershin of the Sect Commissi JN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, | have hereunto set my hau the seal of this Commision to be affixed at Mandaluyong Cit Philippines, this day of .february, Two Thousand Seven. § o'clock in the afters ud and caused Metro Manila, Director Compatfy Registration and Monitoring DepartmentLSHAYNE A FAIRBANKS, Filipino of Iegel age and wa Se ase at No. 35 - 8 Santa St, Diamond Sobdivsion, McAcher Higiesy. Frey Balibago, ‘Gay, Pampanga, after having been duly sworm i accordance with law, do hereby depose and say- 1. _ Lam the personal secretary of Mr. Norman Haynes (” Mr. Haynes”) cone of the owners of Manila Exploration Co.-Annex, Ltd. (“MECO”) since 21 July 5006 to present. Our office address is located in No. 35 - & Sarita St, Diamond Subdivision, McArhur Highway, Brgy. Balibago, Angeles City, Pampanga (Office Address"). We are engaged in the conduct of exploratory drilling electronic prospecting and excavation research. | 2. Taso personally know Mr. Tony Brian Horn (Maz. Horn”). He was 2 former contractual consultant and part of the Managerial Staff of MECO. Mr. Hom also represented himself as an evangelical minister/pastor for a certain Certificate of Partnership, Records of Partnership Participation, Investors Data Base; Subsisting Contracts, and Other MECO/OPSEC Files. Pp eeprom pants YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to make an immediate search of the promises of MR. TONY BRIAN HORN, with address at Sapang Biabas. Dau. Mabalacat, Pampanga at anytime of the day or night, and toMm fo e 6 i . You are hereby further directed to submit a reasm wath pr cu! i days From today Fit i | | GIVEN UNDER MY-HAND AND SEAL OF THIS COURT to \EBEE “yer dey of _Cetober __ 2009, here at Guiba, Nueva Eo sae | Ft! |cartment of Interior ang Lows Uy resi Notional Police Commissitn y. ~ AL OFFICE 3, PHILIPPINE NA GIONAL SPECIAL OPERATIONS GROUP ‘Camp Olivas, City of SEISURE RECEIPT ‘Sen Fernando, Pampanz= ANNEX™ rerog Dy 2229 THIS 18 TO CERTIFY that the undersigned has seized and taken possession on the property herein below described from jn accordance with Search Warrant No. 71208 presence of herein witness to whom the duplicate of this receipt dated _ Oc TOSER _O1 qo _BEIFY HOEe O12 OF of RTC, Br. _32 which search and seizure was done in the is given and owner of the subject proper seized. juantity_| Description [Remarks ae TFA BERIT | cCHpr OT st” i tac ee TOES . | (a ea sag ligne Pach A nape, ES ee oT eet HOLA a) | — WITNESS/ES TO SEYZU ieee, oct awe B- (Signal over Printed ‘pame) INVENTORY: (Signature over Printed name)@ @ ACKNOWLEDGMENT ANNEX“ BY THESE PRESENTS: £3D., » agents oF her oblREPUBLIC OF THE PHRPPINES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION SEC Biking. EDSA. Greennils Cay of Mandaluyong, Mero Mania BEAL EE YX ™ Company Reg. No. 8200614739 eg, CERTIFICATE OF FILING OF AMENDED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: THIS ISTO CERTIFY that the amended articles of incorporation of the OPSEC INTERNATIONAL GROUP INC. (Amending Article 111 thereof.) annexed. adopted on January 97, 2008 by majority vote of the Board of tors and by the vote of the stockholders owning or representing at least twor thirds of the outstanding capital stock, and certified under oath by the Seerciary and maierigy of the Board of Directors uf the curparation was appraved by the ‘sion on this date pursuant to the provision of Scetion 16 of the Corporation of the Philippines, Batas Pambansa Bly. 6, approved on May 1. L980 and cw thereofare filed with the Commission. Unicss this corporation obtains or already has obtained the appropriate Secondary License from this Commission, this Certificate docs not authorize it to undertake business ae requiring a Secondary License from this Commission stch as, but not limited to acting as: broker or dealer in securities. government securities cligible dealer (GSED), investment adviser of an investment company, closc-cud or upen-cad investment company, investment house, transfer agent, commodity financial futures evchange/broker/merchant. financing campany. pre-need plat agent in pre-need plans and time shares/club sharesimembership certificates issuers or selling agents thereof. Neither docs this Certificate constitute as permit to undertake activities for which other government agencies require a license or permit. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, | have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of this Copimission to be affixed at Mandaluyong City, Metro Manila, Philippines, this 30 Hay of January, Two Thousand Eight. Se BENITO A. CATARAN Director Company Registration and Monitering Department Se ee® ® j _aANEX* SSS eee | MYLENEA YTURRALDE-Ct__- e Lawyer} Reskor. ee QS | care Frepet Zoe Pampsags PaBierincs Fae aS) ITD | Tegra (aoe) 298200 | March 16, 2009 MR: TONY B. HORN c/o Trinity Baptist Church Bray. Sapang Bayabas Dau, Mabalacat, Pampanga Dear Mr. Horn: My client, OPSEC INTERNATIONAL GROUP INC. (OPSEC, for brevity) has referred fe Te for appropriate legal action your accountability amounting to PESOS: NINETY THOUSAND see HUNDRED. THIRTY NINE PESOS AND SEVENTY FIVE CENTAVOS (P90,429-75) representing ‘he amount of company funds unaccounted for the auditing period of January to October 2008. in addition to this amount, reports showed that during your employment with OPSEC you hace taken without authority and to the damage of the company, the following documents /items: 4. Accomplished Contract of Employment for all OPSEC employees, 2. Payroll Register for the Period of May 2007 to October 2008; 3, Database Files for all OPSEC employees; and 4, Allother communications files Likewise, it has also.come to the attention of my client that in spite of your separacion From OPSEC, you have been unofficially communicating negetive information to Ey client's employees and investors with the evident intent of undermining the reputation anc goodwill of OPSEC to its serious damage and prejudice. 7. sid any legal complication, demand ts hereby made upon you, to coage and desist effective immediately upon your receipt hereof, from engaging in 2ny stabilization activity or commznication with my client's present and previous employees 2s well.as its investors, which ‘ends to threaten the stability of my clients good standing. Demand is algo made upon you to pay in full the amount of 790,439.75, plus th abovementioned items, within SEVENTY TWO (72) hours days from receipt ofthis 1ette Otherwise, to protect my client's interests, | will be contrain to file CRIMINAL and civil cases against you.we will not hesitate 125 Se hd ‘acta you fall ep accede t this legume and lel em the appropriate GSES: x dang cs of cand a | Please be guided accordingly: ‘Thank you- sincerely yours,AFFIDAVIT 4.5L: Dimond Subdivision, Balibese, Anscics Cay, Under, epee and so | 1. In August of 2009 I became aware of a blog'wchsite that was created by Mx Tomy Hom designed to discredit Manila Exploration Co, LTD L Jexry Beadferd of legal age, Amcicae moricd, with adios of No 324 Se Se 2. I contacted Mr. Hom by e-fhail and phone and ask why he wes tying to case problems between Mr. Norman Haynes (Partner of MECO) and those that loaned i ‘operating capital to promote MECO; 3. Mr. Hom said there was a letter sent to his church by MECO's Attomey stating that Mr. Hora was a Thief, Liar, and Extortionist and that since MECO’s attomey sent a letter to his church that (He) Mr. Hom was going to do his best to contact all the MECO loan participants to discredit Mr. Hayes. 4, Twas in the USA when I first communicated with Mr. Hom and waited until I Tetumed to Angeles City (© sec Mr. Horn. f am not a professional mediator but felt that since [ was a personal friend of both Mr. Norman Haynes and Mr. Horn that hopefully I could help to resolve this issue. 5. Mr. Hom told me that he wanted Mr, Haynes to pay him $250,000 US dollars cash and in exchange Mr. Hom would disable the blogiweb-site, drop his labor case and would cease and desist communicating with the MECO supporters. 6. Mr, Hom had selected a date of October 1* 2009 as the last day this $250,000 could be paid. I personally went to Mr. Ho's tome on. September 25* to ask Mr. Hor for more time for Mr. Haynes to pay the $250,000 US Dollars. 7. Mr. Hom said to me if he did not receive the $250,000 dy the duc date that he was. going to the US with all the documents lne Had taken from MECO and do his best to stir up trouble. 8, After Mr. Hom realized that Mr. Haynes could not pay the $250,000 by the due date, Mr. Hom said he would extend the due date but, Mr. Haynes must pay $10,000 US dollars every week on top of the demand of $250,000 US dollars. Affiant further says none PAGE ach PS doa Prpck 216 MAD sseuE9 3WiX a oe HELLO LEGAL TEAM, 1AM NORMAN HAYNES, THE LETTER BELOW IS WHAT JERRY BRADFORD 4 MECO EMPLOYEE HAS SENT TO HIS FRIENDS AND CLIENTS WHO HAVE INVESTED IN MECO. THEY ARE HIS PERSONAL FRIENDS. BELOW THAT IS NEW PROPAGANDA THAT TONY HORN IS ISSUING AS OF TODAY. SANDE MILLER IS ONE OF OUR INVESTORS. CAN WE PRAY FOR A TROTO STOP THIS MANIAC HORN? THANKS - NORMAN ‘Hello Sandi This is my response to (What's up with this Tony guy) ‘Norman is working hard to get everyone's money back and has some very positive things in the works, I Have been in Angeles City working with Norman for over 2 weeks and feel good about everyone Receiving the money back they loaned MECO and that MECO will finally have the finances to go After the BIG sites that will pay everyone the return we have all been looking forward to. It took me a long time to begin to think different about Pastor Tony since at one time I attended his Church And respected and admired his Christian walk Just think of al the good work he could have done if he Would have spent the 100's and possibly thousands of hours sharing the Gospel insteed of trying to Extort $250,000 US dollars CASH ftom MECO?? I feel his actions are not of Christian origin. There wes a technicality to do with a date is why they cleared the charges but those Charges are in the process of being reinstated Tony has a lot more charges coming, one of them will be extortion which I will be a witness on since I was ‘The person that tried to negotiate between Norman and Tony. Tony wanted Norman to Pay him $250,000 US. Cash and in exchange Tony would drop his labor Case, take down the Blog'web-site And stop harassing the MECO supporters. It looks to me that Tony has made some real Bad choices And will most likely pay the price tor what he has done and is still doing PS. The best thing to do if you do not want to receive e-mails from Tony is to simply reply to his last E-mail and Demand that he Cease and Desist sending you e-mails end if he sends another e-mail ‘You will contract the authorities for help. ~---~-Original Message-—- From: Sandi Miller