Republic of the Philippines

Department of Justice, Region V

National Prosecution Service
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
Sorsogon City

PEOPLE OF THE PHLIPPINES

Complainant,
NPS Nos. V-06-INV-20B – 042
TO 043

For: BP 6, RESISTANCE AND

- versus - DISOBEDIENCE OF PERSON IN
AUTHORITY
RYAN DALANA
ALBERT AGUIRE
CHRISTOHER CAPARIÑO
Respondents.
x---------------------x

JOINT COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT
WE, RYAN DALANA (of Sto Domingo Bacon District, Sorsogon City),
ALBERT AGUIRE (of Lagundi Batuhan, Masbate City) and CHRISTOHER
CAPARIÑO (of Buenaswerte San Fernando, Masbate City) all of legal age
after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, depose and state that:

1. We are the respondents in the above-captioned case;

2. The acts alleged in the complaint and in the affidavits supporting it do

not sufficiently show that we are responsible for BP 6 and RESISTANCE
AND DISOBEDIENCE OF PERSON IN AUTHORITY and/or that we
are probably guilty thereof and thus should be held for trial;

3. For the crime of RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE OF PERSON

IN AUTHORITY (Ryan Delana), even if the allegations of the police
are truthful, those will not suffice to constitute a crime. The two key
elements of resistance and serious disobedience punished under Art. 151
of the RPC are: (1) That a person in authority or his agent is engaged in
the performance of official duty or gives a lawful order to the offender;
and (2) That the offender resists or seriously disobeys such person or his
agent. In this case, there was no disobedience nor resistance since what
we did is only to swerve to the road going to the capitol compound. We
were not supposed to stop because we did not reach the checkpoint yet. It
was our choice to go there in the capitol compound and there was nothing
 wrong in that. True enough, to negate criminal intent, I (Ryan)
voluntarily submitted myself to police authorities upon coming back to
the road where there was the checkpoint;

4. For the crime of BP 6 (Albert Aguire and Christopher Capariño), the law
provides that, it is unlawful to carry outside of one’s residence any
bladed, pointed or blunt weapon such as “knife,” “spear,” “pana,”
“dagger,” “bolo,” “barong,” “kris,” or “chako,” except where such
articles are being used as necessary tools or implements to earn a
livelihood or in pursuit of a lawful activity. In this case, those bladed
weapons our used by us (Albert and
Christopher) in our job in a hydraulics
company. We use it to cut, trim or fit the
hydraulic hose. Cited as photograph beside
is an example of hydraulic hose which
we’re working with. To attest that we are
really working in the hydraulics company,
our shirts (uniforms) in the mugshots will
this, since we were just from work then;
Hydraulic Hose

5. That for the above reasons, we humbly submit that we were not at fault in
the incident subject of this complaint;

6. Thus, we execute this affidavit to attest to the truth of the foregoing,

SPECIFICALLY, FOR THE DISMISSAL OF THE INSTANT
COMPLAINT FOR LACK OF SUFFICIENT BASIS TO SHOW THAT
BP 6 and RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE OF PERSON IN
AUTHORITY HAD BEEN COMMITTED AND/OR THAT WE ARE
PROBABLY GUILTY THEREOF, AND THUS SHOULD BE HELD
FOR TRIAL.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, We have set my hands this 24th day of

February, 2020 at Sorsogon City, Philippines.

RYAN DALANA ALBERT AGUIRE

Affiant Affiant

CHRISTOHER CAPARIÑO
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 24th day of February, 2020 at

Sorsogon City, Philippines.

COPY FURNISHED:
SORSOGON CITY POLICE STATION